The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Rode NT5
Old 21st November 2011
  #61
Gear Addict
 

I have to wonder about that 'variables' when it comes to these mics...

I had a set for over two years before I sold them. I think I got one usable thing out of them the whole time.. they always sounded too 'harsh' for me.. very bright and not in a nice way... I got a set of Beeznees Lulu FET's and never took the '5's out of the box after that.. so I sold them.

That being said.. the 'variables' come to mind..

1. In a different room maybe they would have 'worked'.. (Though I used them for live recording twice with the same result).

2. Mine were series one (by the photos), and therefore maybe not of the quality that late models are/were..

3. Maybe my 'ears' just did not like them..

I had a Classic II as well and it was much the same.. Rode mics just tend to be too 'brittle' for me.. However, others have used them to great effect. Rode service is usually second to none and I do have a pair of Event Opals (also made by RODE), that are fantastic..

In the end... get a set and try them out for yourself. Maybe your 'ears' will like them, maybe they won't.
Old 21st November 2011
  #62
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by danander11 View Post
I have to wonder about that 'variables' when it comes to these mics...

I had a set for over two years before I sold them. I think I got one usable thing out of them the whole time.. they always sounded too 'harsh' for me.. very bright and not in a nice way... I got a set of Beeznees Lulu FET's and never took the '5's out of the box after that.. so I sold them.

That being said.. the 'variables' come to mind..

1. In a different room maybe they would have 'worked'.. (Though I used them for live recording twice with the same result).

2. Mine were series one (by the photos), and therefore maybe not of the quality that late models are/were..

3. Maybe my 'ears' just did not like them..

I had a Classic II as well and it was much the same.. Rode mics just tend to be too 'brittle' for me.. However, others have used them to great effect. Rode service is usually second to none and I do have a pair of Event Opals (also made by RODE), that are fantastic..

In the end... get a set and try them out for yourself. Maybe your 'ears' will like them, maybe they won't.
I think just about every microphone is like that. In a particular room recording a particular source with a particular preamp, it could be awesome. In a different room, etc., it could suck. It all depends.

Personally I've had good luck with my NT5s, which are the older style, but these days when I want a small-diaphragm mic I generally reach for the pair of Mojave MA-101fet mics instead. Still nice to have the Rodes when I need them, though.
Old 21st November 2011
  #63
Lives for gear
Then NT5s hold up well on ac gtr against some outstanding SDCs in this shootout:

Flatpicking Guitar Magazine: Articles: Small-Diaphragm Condenser Microphone Comparison
Old 21st November 2011
  #64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votchi View Post
Hi there.
In the beginning I must say I hate the articles starting with: "I don't have the choice to compare this two mics at the same time, but as I remember using it years ago..." or "I don't have this mic, but others say it's a piece of sh...".
My decisions are based on what I hear.
I own a pair of KM 184, pair of NT 5 and I want to buy one other pair of mics similar to KM184. I study sound engineering at the university in Prague (HAMU), and I have a great chance to make some classical recordings at a very good concert hall (the Concert hall of Bohuslav Martinu). Two days ago my local Beyer dealer managed lent me a pair of Beyer MC 930s so I could compare them to Neumann KM 184s.
Yesterday I decided to make some more tests in my recording studio. I took a pair of Rode NT-5s, 184s and 930s and made a record of my drumset (I must say I'm no drummer, but I got the basics years ago). I made the AB system about 1m far from cymbals, mics capsules were 190cm from the ground. Mics were at the closest possible position to each other (as you can see in included photos).

It was VERY surprising for me especially after reading the threads about NT-5s (and how "bad" are they) and about 930s (and how "sweet" are they"). In the orchestra sound, focuse on the harp, violins and flutes.
At the drumset take a very good attention to the sound of the snare and the drumroll.

I decided to share the raw files with you cause I found it very interesting. I shorten the orchestral files (the original has over 1 hour) and I gained the KM184s +5,1dB to be at the same level as the 930s. (930s are more sensitive as the record gain was set to the same level).
You can download the zip file including source files here:
http://studio.dunny.cz/mictest/raw_records.zip
recorded at 44,1 KHz 24 bit wav)

and the photo documentation here:
http://studio.dunny.cz/mictest/photos.zip

The orchestral part was recorded using Tascam HS-P82
Drumset was recorded via R.M.E. OctaMicII ADAT -> R.M.E 9652 HDSP -> Cubase 5.5.3

Wow, I've only listened to the drum files and mostly went back and forth from the KM184's and the NT5's vs the KM184's are scary close. The NT5's are a tad brighter, and the KM184's have a bit better lower mids, but It's not a 1000 dollar price differnce if you ask me. I always assumed he KM184's would be smoother, and they might be a tad bit smoother but not much. My listening system is a Lynx going into Focal Solo 6b with a Tapco 10" Sub. Out of the 3 the Mc930's sound the brightest and probably most aggressive, but it's like splitting hairs. Nice room sound BTW!

After a little further listening I do hear that the KM184's are more focused sounding as well.

Last edited by BioMichanical; 21st November 2011 at 10:29 PM.. Reason: Add thoughts
Old 22nd November 2011
  #65
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by BioMichanical View Post
The NT5's are a tad brighter, and the KM184's have a bit better lower mids, but It's not a 1000 dollar price differnce if you ask me. I always assumed he KM184's would be smoother, and they might be a tad bit smoother but not much.
Exactly!
Old 22nd November 2011
  #66
Quote:
Originally Posted by gehauser View Post
Then NT5s hold up well on ac gtr against some outstanding SDCs in this shootout:

Flatpicking Guitar Magazine: Articles: Small-Diaphragm Condenser Microphone Comparison
The list says NT2 not NT5
Old 22nd November 2011
  #67
Gear Addict
 
HDJK's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hello people View Post
The list says NT2 not NT5
The author mentioned in another thread that it's a typo.
Old 22nd November 2011
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Yes, more likely a typo than mistaking an NT2 for a small diaphragm mic - for an entire recording session.
Old 22nd November 2011
  #69
Gear Maniac
 
soundinista's Avatar
 

some fascinating stuff here. I own a pair (as well as other things to compare them to), and my impression has been - like some people here - that they are decent for the price on general duties, but that they do seem to like an acoustic guitar.

Also thought-provoking to see China referred to as "one of the loser countries". It's always intriguing to hear an alternative, non-mainstream, view of the current state of global economics and manufacturing.
Old 23rd November 2011
  #70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Ransom View Post
Yes, more likely a typo than mistaking an NT2 for a small diaphragm mic - for an entire recording session.
Haha...I thought that was a bit strange...like...er...what kind of dudes were doing this shoot out that they didn't notice this huge black sheep NT2 in amongst the others?!

Old 23rd November 2011
  #71
Lives for gear
 
haryy's Avatar
Nt5, best mic for snare top in our locker. Handles extreme spl and provides natural sound. Coupled with a good condenser under, snare drum needs almost no eq.
Old 23rd November 2011
  #72
Quote:
Originally Posted by haryy View Post
Nt5, best mic for snare top in our locker. Handles extreme spl and provides natural sound. Coupled with a good condenser under, snare drum needs almost no eq.
Wow, that's intetesting. I usually use mine for o/heads exclusively, however my last (rather hastey) tracking session resulted in better snare through the o'heads, than from the audix i5 that was in the snare itself.

I'll try the NT5 on snare now. Paired up with 414B-ULS, may give me what I'm after.
Thank you for the suggestion haryy

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 23rd November 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
 
haryy's Avatar
Hope it did the job.. i also make a protective housing around the mic in order to reduce hihat bleed. I make it with 2 layers of auralex absorptive material wrapped around the mic. It stops hihat bleed into the mic. Got the idea from Barresi's video.
Old 24th November 2011
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Tubthumper's Avatar
 

Terry Manning has, IIRC, spoken of using an NT5 on snare.

I tape an NT5 to an SM57 for snare use. I'll also mic the snare shell with an NT5.
Old 28th November 2011
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubthumper View Post
Terry Manning has, IIRC, spoken of using an NT5 on snare.

I tape an NT5 to an SM57 for snare use. I'll also mic the snare shell with an NT5.
Thubms up for the NT5's on acoustic guitar, guitar sounds larger than life to my ears.
Old 29th December 2011
  #76
Lives for gear
 
guitarmax_99's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubthumper View Post
Terry Manning has, IIRC, spoken of using an NT5 on snare.

I tape an NT5 to an SM57 for snare use. I'll also mic the snare shell with an NT5.
Do you start running into phase issues with that setup? What about bleed (I think it would be quite excessive)?
Old 29th December 2011
  #77
My church just purchased a pair of NT5's to mic the choir when they sing; they sound great for this live application. I have a pair of NT55's in my studio. With the card capsule, I have recorded acoustic guitar in stereo wtih the xy setup and have obtained great results. I also have tried the mic with the omni capsule on acoustic guitar and obtain very good results as well. They don't offer the exact detail of higher end mic's, but they still sound very good.
Old 29th December 2011
  #78
Gear Addict
 
monsieur x's Avatar
The NT5 is truly an excellent microphone! I consider it high end!

It's not a Gefell M29x, but it totally has it's place in a high end mic locker.

You people hating on the NT5 probably use a horrible 57 on the snare for god's sake. . .

PS I don't own them, but go as far as borrowing them sometimes! (Even with access to KM184s already at the studio)
Old 30th December 2011
  #79
Lives for gear
 
edva's Avatar
They're thin and hard sounding, which is OK in some applications (cuts the boom on acoustic guitar). Good build quality, as typical with Rode, and good value for the money. Moderately quiet. But, not a warm or rich sounding mic.
Old 30th December 2011
  #80
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by edva View Post
They're thin and hard sounding, which is OK in some applications (cuts the boom on acoustic guitar). Good build quality, as typical with Rode, and good value for the money. Moderately quiet. But, not a warm or rich sounding mic.
If a natural high-end roll-off (ie: "warm") is what you're looking for, this mic is not for you. I'd hardly call it "thin," however. I've recorded classical string, brass ensembles and acoustic guitar with these mics and never had a lack of or muddy-sounding low end.
Old 30th December 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 

FWIW, there was a massive shootout of SDC's, I believe on this site. As i remember it was at least 12 different SDC's and I think the primary focus was on acoustic guitar.

The ones that sounded and rated highest where Josphson and Neumann (maybe Schoeps too) but believe it or not, Peluso has a mic that was very very good, and its sound IMO, was in the class with the three mentioned above.

The NT5 wasnt even close
Old 31st December 2011
  #82
Lives for gear
 
edva's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6strings View Post
If a natural high-end roll-off (ie: "warm") is what you're looking for, this mic is not for you. I'd hardly call it "thin," however. I've recorded classical string, brass ensembles and acoustic guitar with these mics and never had a lack of or muddy-sounding low end.
Well, it captures bass frequencies, but the way they are represented lacks warmth. That's not always a bad thing though. Some sources don't need warming up.
However, they also are somewhat "sterile", or dimensionally flat, in the upper frequency range, to my ear at least. Some people may like that sound also.
Clean, yes, accurate, pretty much, well built and good value, agreed. They are certainly more than decent, and could be called good sounding mics, but A/B them with other mics and you may hear what i mean. Not to dis Rode, great company, very usable, affordable products. If you like it, fine.
Old 31st December 2011
  #83
Lives for gear
 
rocksure's Avatar
Horses for courses. There are other SDC's I would rather use than NT5's. I do like many of the Rode mic models a lot, but these are not my favourites. Still, you can get very usable sounds with them. However, I would choose Octava 012's, AKG C451's or Shure sm81's over NT5's most of the time.
Old 31st December 2011
  #84
PDC
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by edva View Post
They're thin and hard sounding, which is OK in some applications (cuts the boom on acoustic guitar). Good build quality, as typical with Rode, and good value for the money. Moderately quiet. But, not a warm or rich sounding mic.
I guess I have been listening longer through other mics with more musical glue, because I just do not hear the love. I know that people posted graphs and such, but there is more to a mic than a frequency plot. There is stuff at play that we don't even know to measure for (yet). I WANT to like Rode. I sell them and can buy them dirt cheap. It would make good sense for me to have them and get rid of more expensive mics while I still can. But, they just sound hard. The NT5 just does not sooth and smooth the way a KM84 can. I don't know what to call it but I almost hear what sounds like muted aliased notes at times. It makes everything sound electronic, and yields less depth.

When the Neumann and Sennheiser factory guys come to our shop, I get thrown under the bus, because I make a stand sometimes. Just because a mic performs better on the scope or in a chamber, does not mean that it is better musically. Yes, people can copy the measurements, the response charts, the self noise...but that is just it. They, even improving on original designs, are not capturing the musical aspects of the products mimicked. The KM184 is not a KM84. My boss says it is improved so it is better. Maybe the average person's better is not my better. I am listening to the music, as a musician and a fan. I am also listening prophetically, thinking out the labor of the mix, something he knows nothing about.
Old 1st January 2012
  #85
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PDC View Post
...There is stuff at play that we don't even know to measure for (yet).
I don't disagree with anything you've said, except that.
What we can measure outstrips human performance by so much it's funny.
In other fields, we could detect a candle flame on the moon's surface (obviously, the equivalent).

I'm pretty certain the state of technology is of the level that if someone can reliably detect something different between two sounds, someone can measure it. I'm not aware of a single proven exception.
Just saying, I just see that assertion come up quite a bit.
Old 1st January 2012
  #86
PDC
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Ransom View Post
I don't disagree with anything you've said, except that.
What we can measure outstrips human performance by so much it's funny.
In other fields, we could detect a candle flame on the moon's surface (obviously, the equivalent).

I'm pretty certain the state of technology is of the level that if someone can reliably detect something different between two sounds, someone can measure it. I'm not aware of a single proven exception.
Just saying, I just see that assertion come up quite a bit.
I don't think we have all of the questions to answer just yet. I agree that we measure things that just plain don't matter, and cannot hear everything test equipment does. I work with absolutes. Lets consider speakers. We can take a cross section of speakers that have the same sensitivity, frequency response, have the same T/S parameters etc, but they do not sound the same. Ask owners of EAW KF850s, who have had drivers from multiple manufacturers in their boxes. Same thing with mics. We can measure some measurement mics and find that some are better than others, with nearly the same specs.
Old 2nd January 2012
  #87
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Well, I do think non-linearities account for a huge amount of "phenomena". And they are maybe not accounted for enough, or in the right way at the moment when it comes to measuring specs.

Mics are such oddballs too. So many variables.

One other thing I noticed recently was that the celestion drivers (Guitar) all look so damn similar on paper, and yet sound so different.
Old 2nd July 2015
  #88
bee
Lives for gear
 
bee's Avatar
 

Anyone know the difference between the two versions? Are they still being made in Australia?
Old 2nd July 2015
  #89
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 471 views: 136788
Avatar for RobAnderson
RobAnderson 9th November 2010
replies: 1111 views: 227750
Avatar for ObscureMics
ObscureMics 1 day ago
replies: 120 views: 28403
Avatar for didier.brest
didier.brest 3rd December 2012
replies: 90 views: 30965
Avatar for Snapchat2314715
Snapchat2314715 4th October 2018
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump