[hank alrich]

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
"Eeyore" wrote ...
Given certain people's sarcastic comments about the mic list at The Horn
recently
http://thehorn.co.uk/ click on Tech Spec

Which I will not defend, I was just wondering if the Beta57a/58a
versions are really any much better than SMs.

They seems to have the same Rocky Mountain freq responses that I loathe
with the SMs, so comments ?

I wouldn't bet too much on published FR graphs, especially Shure's.

If you think that the 57/58 graphs are rocky, just look at the ones for
the OM5/6/7 mics that several of us profess our undying love for in a
different thread. The crazy thing is that as ugly as the FR plots look,
they sound quite natural for close-miced vocals.

Perhaps because the Audix curves are ~real vs. the Shure curves
likely having been drawn freehand by a marketing gerb?

Or because those measurements were made decades ago with the mics
looking into a transformer front end not the contemporary "affordable"
solid state variety.

A 57 into my Great River is not the same mic as into my Mackie 1202,
even though it is exactly the same mic.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Eeyore]

hank alrich wrote:

Richard Crowley wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote ...

I wouldn't bet too much on published FR graphs, especially Shure's.

If you think that the 57/58 graphs are rocky, just look at the ones for
the OM5/6/7 mics that several of us profess our undying love for in a
different thread. The crazy thing is that as ugly as the FR plots look,
they sound quite natural for close-miced vocals.

Perhaps because the Audix curves are ~real vs. the Shure curves
likely having been drawn freehand by a marketing gerb?

Or because those measurements were made decades ago with the mics
looking into a transformer front end not the contemporary "affordable"
solid state variety.

Of what impedance too ? Note Paul Stamler's discoveries on this front with the
'57.

If the humps are resonances, today's higher impedance mic imputs will likely
underdamp them and the peaks will be greater.


A 57 into my Great River

Does it have input Z settings ?


is not the same mic as into my Mackie 1202,
even though it is exactly the same mic.

Interesting.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Eeyore wrote:

Given certain people's sarcastic comments about the mic list at The Horn
recently
http://thehorn.co.uk/ click on Tech Spec

Which I will not defend, I was just wondering if the Beta57a/58a
versions are really any much better than SMs.

Sorry for starting this thread and then dropping out of it but I've been
unexpectedly heavily involved with estimates and specifications for a couple
of jobs.

Will get back ASAP

Graham

[Eric B]

The greatest difference between the 58 and the beta version is that
the beta use neodymnium magnet structures which means they are hotter.
To my ear they are also brighter. Their polar pick up is about as
bizarre as the old 58. The 57 and 58 use the same motor but the 58 has
a ball windscreen. I think this is also true of the betas. The
greatest reason to keep the 58s in your mic tool kit is that every
live singer in the world knows them. They may say, oh, boy, sigh, a
58, but they know it. The 58 is a standard microphone, like in the US
Dunkin Donuts is a standard coffee- certainly not the best, but you
know what you are getting. I did live sound last night in an open mic
situation and the 58 was the mic most people chose. I did use better
mics on acoustic instruments.
One mic to widen your mic collection and to look good in the Tech
listing on the website. Get a Neuman KSM401. The main reason, the
reason the owner will spring for it, is that it will look good in the
Tech Spec listing. It will enhance the star like egos of the
performers and therefore their performance. The owner will sell more
drinks...
In Europe Beyer M69, M88, M500 and M201 are all improvements over
the 58. They have probably changed some of the names by now for new
product. These all have hypercardioid pickup patterns and all have a
more open pickup pattern than the 58. The M69 works well live, The M88
is awesome but very bassy. The M500 is a ribbon with lower sensitivity
and very well behaved bass proximity effect. This would be a very good
choice unless physical abuse is a factor. The M201 is one of my
favorite mics but they need a windscreen, and have high handling
noise. I hardly ever use them anymore.
Sennheiser/ Neumann is also a local EC brand. The MD431 was the best
live vocal mic ever made. They sell the 409 figure 8 as some other
number now. This is the one that is sort of square and not very deep
front to back. An amazing mic. They make some newer dynamic hand held
models that are not bad at all. I'm sorry, I don't know the models.
So far all the models mentioned (except the Neuman KSM401) are
dynamic. Despite being more delicate and needing to be powered,
condenser mics are often categorically better for almost every
application presuming your mixer can handle the hotter signal. You
have an A+H. It can.
If you want to contact me off group you can...
Best regards,
Eric Blackmer
PS. In my experience no AKG mics, regardless, are flat. Some models,
especially their condensers, sound really... 'nice'. The C 451 is
cool, there is a vocal mic version C535, that is killer. Their
dynamics are pretty good. They usually had very workable bass roll off
filters on board to compensate for the proximity effect. The best of
these bass filters was in the Sennheiser MD421, 431, 441.

[liquidator[_2_]]

"Eric B" wrote in message
...
The 58 is a standard microphone, like in the US
Dunkin Donuts is a standard coffee- certainly not the best, but you
know what you are getting.

Odd- never heard that And I'm a pretty heavy coffe drinker.

Around here White Castle is pretty much the standard.

Won't eat the burgers, I can tolerate the fish sandwich...but have had
probably thousands of gallons of that coffee...


There are Dinkin' Donuts areound here, but not the place of choice.

The last ten years, lots more competition in late night coffee...Tim
Horton's has grabbed a chunk...but White Castle is still number one.


Don't think they have WC's all over the US though, and I suspect there are
Dunkin' Donuts all over.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"liquidator" wrote in message
...

"Eric B" wrote in message
...
The 58 is a standard microphone, like in the US
Dunkin Donuts is a standard coffee- certainly not the best, but you
know what you are getting.

Odd- never heard that And I'm a pretty heavy coffe drinker.

Around here White Castle is pretty much the standard.

Won't eat the burgers, I can tolerate the fish sandwich...but have had
probably thousands of gallons of that coffee...


There are Dinkin' Donuts areound here, but not the place of choice.

The last ten years, lots more competition in late night coffee...Tim
Horton's has grabbed a chunk...but White Castle is still number one.



I have never seen a open WC in Ny
there ae some former WC buildings but as long a I have been around they
have other businesses in them
G
Don't think they have WC's all over the US though, and I suspect there are
Dunkin' Donuts all over.

[Geoff]

Eric B wrote:
PS. In my experience no AKG mics, regardless, are flat. Some models,
especially their condensers, sound really... 'nice'. The C 451 is
cool, there is a vocal mic version C535, that is killer.

The C451 (old and new) is a totally different capsule to C535.

Maybe you are defficient in the treble department, or simply mentally
normalised to over-bright ?

geoff

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 9/11/08 21:50, in article ,
"geoff" wrote:

Eric B wrote:
PS. In my experience no AKG mics, regardless, are flat. Some models,
especially their condensers, sound really... 'nice'. The C 451 is
cool, there is a vocal mic version C535, that is killer.

The C451 (old and new) is a totally different capsule to C535.

Maybe you are defficient in the treble department, or simply mentally
normalised to over-bright ?

The old C451 had changeable capsules, and there was a vocal capsule, the
CK5, which looks like there might be a link to the C535... I haven't held
one in my hands yet, so I'm not sure.

The new C451 has the CK1 capsule (supposedly), but I think it's not
changeable anymore.

--
Joe Kotroczo

[Geoff]

Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 9/11/08 21:50, in article
, "geoff"
wrote:

Eric B wrote:
PS. In my experience no AKG mics, regardless, are flat. Some models,
especially their condensers, sound really... 'nice'. The C 451 is
cool, there is a vocal mic version C535, that is killer.

The C451 (old and new) is a totally different capsule to C535.

Maybe you are defficient in the treble department, or simply mentally
normalised to over-bright ?

The old C451 had changeable capsules, and there was a vocal capsule,
the CK5, which looks like there might be a link to the C535... I
haven't held one in my hands yet, so I'm not sure.

The new C451 has the CK1 capsule (supposedly), but I think it's not
changeable anymore.

C535 uses capsule CK31 ( was CE31) .

There was an old (very old part) coded 2003Z0009 that may or may not have
been similar to CK5, or the CK5 "product" may in fact use the CK31 capsule -
it certainly looks a similar size/shape to the 535 head.....


The C451B has a fixed capsule that is made up of several separate parts (
electrode, diaphram, and insulator) directly into the body.

geoff

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 9/11/08 23:13, in article ,
"geoff" wrote:

Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 9/11/08 21:50, in article
, "geoff"
wrote:

Eric B wrote:
PS. In my experience no AKG mics, regardless, are flat. Some models,
especially their condensers, sound really... 'nice'. The C 451 is
cool, there is a vocal mic version C535, that is killer.

The C451 (old and new) is a totally different capsule to C535.

Maybe you are defficient in the treble department, or simply mentally
normalised to over-bright ?

The old C451 had changeable capsules, and there was a vocal capsule,
the CK5, which looks like there might be a link to the C535... I
haven't held one in my hands yet, so I'm not sure.

The new C451 has the CK1 capsule (supposedly), but I think it's not
changeable anymore.

C535 uses capsule CK31 ( was CE31) .

There was an old (very old part) coded 2003Z0009 that may or may not have
been similar to CK5, or the CK5 "product" may in fact use the CK31 capsule -
it certainly looks a similar size/shape to the 535 head.....

Now this is really confusing, because AFAIK the CK31 capsule is a capsule
for the AKG GN series goosenecks... And looks nothing like a C535.


--
Joe Kotroczo

[Scott Dorsey]

Joe Kotroczo wrote:

The old C451 had changeable capsules, and there was a vocal capsule, the
CK5, which looks like there might be a link to the C535... I haven't held
one in my hands yet, so I'm not sure.

It's not really much like the C535, but it has some similar baffling to
prevent popping. It's actually not a bad vocal mike although it was never
really very popular.

The new C451 has the CK1 capsule (supposedly), but I think it's not
changeable anymore.

It's not the same capsule.. the geometry is roughly the same, but they
are using an electret now which requires the backplate shape to be
different. Also, the way the diaphragm is mounted has been changed as
well, so it could be made on the automated tensioning system AKG uses.

For the most part I would consider these changes to be improvements, but
not everyone will see them as such.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."