Review / Microphone / Various: Difference between revisions

Line 100:

# Shure Beta 87a

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.

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. There is plenty of room for dynamics in the hands of a skilled artist 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 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.

There is a quality 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, 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 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 Sennheiser e 965 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.

I got the Audix VX-5 in 2018. It is ~~a fine~~ microphone that took the number two spot on my list. Since then the Sennheiser e 965 has bumped it down to number three.

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 for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").

I got the Audix VX-5 in 2018. It is an excellent microphone that took the number two spot on my list. Since then, the Sennheiser e 965 has bumped it down to number three.

Line 113:

Line 115:

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.

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

=== Application - On the Stand ===

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 # Shure Beta 87a
-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.
+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. There is plenty of room for dynamics in the hands of a skilled artist 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 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.
+There is a quality 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, 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 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 Sennheiser e 965 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.
-I got the Audix VX-5 in 2018. It is a fine microphone that took the number two spot on my list. Since then the Sennheiser e 965 has bumped it down to number three.
+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 for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").
+I got the Audix VX-5 in 2018. It is an excellent microphone that took the number two spot on my list. Since then, the Sennheiser e 965 has bumped it down to number three.
@@ Line 113: / Line 115: @@
 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.
+The Shure Beta 87a is at the bottom of the list because it was the most difficult to control for feedback of all of the condenser microphones. This would be a concern in a handheld situation.
 === Application - On the Stand ===