Review / Microphone / Various: Difference between revisions

Line 75:

Where sound quality takes precedence over everything else, the Neumann KMS105 is first. It has very low handling noise so as a handheld unit or on a stand with lots of mechanical noise this would do very well. I also found it to have the best resistance to wind noise and popping "p"s when "eating the mic". I think you would find it very suitable for female vocalists or any vocalists whose voice holds plenty of nuance. This microphone can be very present even at lower volumes. In the hands of a skilled artist, there is plenty of room for dynamics while maintaining detail in softer passages.

There is a quality that is shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens - then these microphones do that. Not being a sound engineer, I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of ~~difference~~ you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser only more so. Think of the difference between red, and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer.

There is a quality that is shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens - then these microphones do that. Not being a sound engineer, I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of dihttps://toonz.ca/bose/wiki/index.php?title=Review_/_Microphone_/_Various&action=edit&section=7fference you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser only more so. Think of the difference between red, and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer.

The Sennheiser e 965. It was introduced in 2008, at close to the same price as the Neumann KMS 105 (above). In 2020, Sennheiser dropped the price as part of a 75th-anniversary promotion, and it is now an exceptional bargain. It is interesting because it has a switchable polar pattern (Supercardioid/Cardioid)~~. It also has a built-in -10 dB pad, and a low-frequency roll-off~~. This gives you the flexibility to use it with a vocalist who cannot consistently sing directly into the microphone. The others on this list are less forgiving.

The Sennheiser e 965. It was introduced in 2008, at close to the same price as the Neumann KMS 105 (above). In 2020, Sennheiser dropped the price as part of a 75th-anniversary promotion, and it is now an exceptional bargain. It is interesting because it has a switchable polar pattern (Supercardioid/Cardioid). This gives you the flexibility to use it with a vocalist who cannot consistently sing directly into the microphone. The others on this list are less forgiving. It also has a built-in -10 dB pad, and a low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").

The AKG C585, Rode S1, and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105.

The AKG C585, Rode S1, and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105 and Sennheiser e 965.

The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 dB attenuation and low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use close-~~mic'ing techniques~~ (~~when you~~ "eat the mic").

The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 dB attenuation and low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").

The Shure Beta 87a is at the bottom of the list because, of all of the condenser microphones, it was the most difficult to control for feedback. This would be a concern in a hand-held situation.

@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 Where sound quality takes precedence over everything else, the Neumann KMS105 is first. It has very low handling noise so as a handheld unit or on a stand with lots of mechanical noise this would do very well. I also found it to have the best resistance to wind noise and popping "p"s when "eating the mic". I think you would find it very suitable for female vocalists or any vocalists whose voice holds plenty of nuance. This microphone can be very present even at lower volumes. In the hands of a skilled artist, there is plenty of room for dynamics while maintaining detail in softer passages.
-There is a quality that is shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens - then these microphones do that. Not being a sound engineer, I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of difference you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser only more so. Think of the difference between red, and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer.
+There is a quality that is shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens - then these microphones do that. Not being a sound engineer, I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of dihttps://toonz.ca/bose/wiki/index.php?title=Review_/_Microphone_/_Various&action=edit&section=7fference you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser only more so. Think of the difference between red, and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer.
-The Sennheiser e 965. It was introduced in 2008, at close to the same price as the Neumann KMS 105 (above). In 2020, Sennheiser dropped the price as part of a 75th-anniversary promotion, and it is now an exceptional bargain. It is interesting because it has a switchable polar pattern (Supercardioid/Cardioid). It also has a built-in -10 dB pad, and a low-frequency roll-off. This gives you the flexibility to use it with a vocalist who cannot consistently sing directly into the microphone. The others on this list are less forgiving.
+The Sennheiser e 965. It was introduced in 2008, at close to the same price as the Neumann KMS 105 (above). In 2020, Sennheiser dropped the price as part of a 75th-anniversary promotion, and it is now an exceptional bargain. It is interesting because it has a switchable polar pattern (Supercardioid/Cardioid). This gives you the flexibility to use it with a vocalist who cannot consistently sing directly into the microphone. The others on this list are less forgiving. It also has a built-in -10 dB pad, and a low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").
-The AKG C585, Rode S1, and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105.
+The AKG C585, Rode S1, and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105 and Sennheiser e 965.
-The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 dB attenuation and low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use close-mic'ing techniques (when you "eat the mic").
+The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 dB attenuation and low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").
 The Shure Beta 87a is at the bottom of the list because, of all of the condenser microphones, it was the most difficult to control for feedback. This would be a concern in a hand-held situation.