ADK Mics?

[[email protected]]

Greetings all,

I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not familiar with the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that price point...so I took the chance and bought it. I see them on-line, going for around $250--$300 new.

I've only messed with mine a short time. It sounds decent, but does have a significant proximity effect. Once you find the sweet spot, it seems to be a very useable microphone for voiceover type recording. I haven't tried it on singing/vocals yet. Having said that....I'm using a Neumann TLM 170 for vocals & seriously doubt the ADK mic will change that (grin).

I'll likely keep it. It's no Neumann, but it sounds better than my other 2 "budget" condenser mics. And besides--can you ever really have enough large diaphragm condenser mics in your locker? (ha ha)

Anyone here use them before? Opinions/comments? It seems to be well made & I'd just like to know more about the brand, etc.

Thanks!

Mike

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/13/2013 3:58 PM, wrote:
> I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not familiar with the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that price point...so I took the chance and bought it. I see them on-line, going for around $250--$300 new.

The company has a conscience and their quality control is pretty good. I
think you got a good deal, assuming that the mic will be useful to you.
If not, you can put it back into circulation probably with no loss.

--
For a good time call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Michael Beacom[_3_]]

In article >,
wrote:

> Greetings all,
>
> I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not familiar with
> the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that price point...so I took
> the chance and bought it. I see them on-line, going for around $250--$300
> new.
>
> I've only messed with mine a short time. It sounds decent, but does have a
> significant proximity effect. Once you find the sweet spot, it seems to be a
> very useable microphone for voiceover type recording. I haven't tried it on
> singing/vocals yet. Having said that....I'm using a Neumann TLM 170 for
> vocals & seriously doubt the ADK mic will change that (grin).
>
> I'll likely keep it. It's no Neumann, but it sounds better than my other 2
> "budget" condenser mics. And besides--can you ever really have enough large
> diaphragm condenser mics in your locker? (ha ha)
>
> Anyone here use them before? Opinions/comments? It seems to be well made &
> I'd just like to know more about the brand, etc.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Mike

from ADK's web site:

http://adkmic.com/catalog/audiophileseries/S-7.php

Cheers
Mike

[geoff]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 11/13/2013 3:58 PM, wrote:
>> I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not
>> familiar with the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that
>> price point...so I took the chance and bought it. I see them
>> on-line, going for around $250--$300 new.
>
> The company has a conscience and their quality control is pretty
> good. I think you got a good deal, assuming that the mic will be
> useful to you. If not, you can put it back into circulation probably
> with no loss.

Do they actually make their mics, have them built to their own design, or
mix'n'match from generic Chinese OEM lparts like many (most ?) others ?

If not all in-house, presumably they are doing additional QC after the
factory.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>Mike Rivers wrote:
>> On 11/13/2013 3:58 PM, wrote:
>>> I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not
>>> familiar with the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that
>>> price point...so I took the chance and bought it. I see them
>>> on-line, going for around $250--$300 new.
>>
>> The company has a conscience and their quality control is pretty
>> good. I think you got a good deal, assuming that the mic will be
>> useful to you. If not, you can put it back into circulation probably
>> with no loss.
>
>Do they actually make their mics, have them built to their own design, or
>mix'n'match from generic Chinese OEM lparts like many (most ?) others ?

ADK was the first company to import and rebadge Feilo microphones into
the US. I don't know what their current state of quality control is, but
they certainly have been doing the job longer than anyone else. If anyone
at least understands the quality control issues, it's probably them.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/17/2013 12:46 AM, geoff wrote:
> Do they actually make their mics, have them built to their own design, or
> mix'n'match from generic Chinese OEM lparts like many (most ?) others ?

Nobody really makes microphones, they get parts and put them together
or have them put together. There are a few common circuits for condenser
mics and a lot of capsules. Case and grill design is sometimes done on
an individual basis, and the quality of the electronics depends on the
quality of parts that are specified and used.

There isn't much point in buying Neumann capsules and putting them in
some other bodies. There are a couple of boutique companies
hand-building capsules but they tend to be specialty mics.

I believe that ADK uses capsules from a few different sources. Don't
worry about where they come from. Try a mic. If you like it and can
afford it, keep it. If not, send it back and try something else.

--
For a good time call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Mike Rivers > wrote:
>On 11/17/2013 12:46 AM, geoff wrote:
>> Do they actually make their mics, have them built to their own design, or
>> mix'n'match from generic Chinese OEM lparts like many (most ?) others ?
>
>Nobody really makes microphones, they get parts and put them together
>or have them put together. There are a few common circuits for condenser
>mics and a lot of capsules. Case and grill design is sometimes done on
>an individual basis, and the quality of the electronics depends on the
>quality of parts that are specified and used.

There ARE still old-line companies like Shure, Neumann, Audio-Technica,
and Sennheiser that actually still design and manufacture from the bottom
up. There are guys like David Bock and David Josephson who are doing that
as well, with newer companies.

Yes, it's true that 90% of the folks selling microphones today are just
throwing together parts they bought from china, including some big names.
But don't tar everyone with that brush... there is a very dramatic split
between the old-line manufacturers and the folks who have shot up in the
past decade of the huge boom in Chinese microphones.

>There isn't much point in buying Neumann capsules and putting them in
>some other bodies. There are a couple of boutique companies
>hand-building capsules but they tend to be specialty mics.

Are Neumann and Sennheiser specialty manufacturers? Actually, Neumann,
Sennheiser, AKG and _maybe_ Shure all have automated diaphragm tensioning
systems of some sort which is a huge boon to consistency and productivity.
Much better than having little old ladies with trampoline gadgets on the
bench and hand-tensioning the way the Chinese guys do. (And the way Neumann
did half a century ago.)
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

"geoff" > wrote in message
...
>>> Counterfeit products,
>>
>> Sure there are counterfeit mics available, however there are genuine
>> models from these manufacturers around the $100 mark. (Not Neumann of
>> course :-) The SM57 is a good example of taking an established
>> design, having it built in a lower labor cost country, and being able
>> to sell it for far less than what it cost decades ago. I wonder if
>> there are even counterfeits of it, would hardly seem worth the effort
>> at the current price. But anything is possible I guess.
>
> Shure(!) are fake SM57/58s .
>
> Capsules are higher (~500R) impedence, and some even have blocks of
> metal(?) embedded in glue to look like the internal transformer ofv the
> genuine mics


I'll take your word for it. Doesn't affect what I wrote however. Genuine
brand mics from many of the previously listed manufacturers ARE available
for around $100.

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Trevor > wrote:
>The SM57 is a good example of taking an established design, having it built
>in a lower labor cost country, and being able to sell it for far less than
>what it cost decades ago. I wonder if there are even counterfeits of it,
>would hardly seem worth the effort at the current price. But anything is
>possible I guess.

The SM-57 is the second most counterfeited microphone in the world, with
the SM-58 being the number one. There are a couple Sennheiser dynamic mikes
which are also very frequently counterfeited. I see them turning up on
Ebay and even in local MI stores all the time.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

Trevor wrote:
> "geoff" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>> Counterfeit products,
>>>
>>> Sure there are counterfeit mics available, however there are genuine
>>> models from these manufacturers around the $100 mark. (Not Neumann
>>> of course :-) The SM57 is a good example of taking an established
>>> design, having it built in a lower labor cost country, and being
>>> able to sell it for far less than what it cost decades ago. I
>>> wonder if there are even counterfeits of it, would hardly seem
>>> worth the effort at the current price. But anything is possible I
>>> guess.
>>
>> Shure(!) are fake SM57/58s .
>>
>> Capsules are higher (~500R) impedence, and some even have blocks of
>> metal(?) embedded in glue to look like the internal transformer ofv
>> the genuine mics
>
>
> I'll take your word for it. Doesn't affect what I wrote however.
> Genuine brand mics from many of the previously listed manufacturers
> ARE available for around $100.


That's accepted. But the suggestion was that those mics are likely not made
in Germany (or UK, or Austria, or USA).


geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>>
>> I'll take your word for it. Doesn't affect what I wrote however.
>> Genuine brand mics from many of the previously listed manufacturers
>> ARE available for around $100.
>
>That's accepted. But the suggestion was that those mics are likely not made
>in Germany (or UK, or Austria, or USA).

It matters a lot more where the people doing the quality control and the
design work are, it seems.

I know that Fletcher claims that the Mexican-made SM57s aren't as good as
the older US-made ones, but I can't tell a difference under normal
circumstances.

Some of those companies also split the manufacturing. AKG makes the voice
coil and vacuum-forms the diaphragm in Austria, then ships them abroad for
final manufacture. Shure makes some condenser microphones that have final
assembly in Mexico, but the diaphragm tensioning is done in a well-secured
and locked-down facility near Chicago and the assemblies shipped South.

There's nothing wrong with cheap offshore manufacture, and many of the old
line companies are doing it. There is something wrong with many of the
designs that are being passed around by cheap offshore manufacturers, though.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Trevor >
> wrote:
>>The SM57 is a good example of taking an established design, having it
>>built
>>in a lower labor cost country, and being able to sell it for far less than
>>what it cost decades ago. I wonder if there are even counterfeits of it,
>>would hardly seem worth the effort at the current price. But anything is
>>possible I guess.
>
> The SM-57 is the second most counterfeited microphone in the world, with
> the SM-58 being the number one. There are a couple Sennheiser dynamic
> mikes
> which are also very frequently counterfeited. I see them turning up on
> Ebay and even in local MI stores all the time.

The only ones I've seen over here are counterfeit Shure radio mic systems,
since genuine ones are a *lot* dearer here.
And the counterfeit ones aren't even all that bad for simple MC type duty.
:-)

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"geoff" > wrote in message
...
>>> Shure(!) are fake SM57/58s .
>>>
>>> Capsules are higher (~500R) impedence, and some even have blocks of
>>> metal(?) embedded in glue to look like the internal transformer ofv
>>> the genuine mics
>>
>>
>> I'll take your word for it. Doesn't affect what I wrote however.
>> Genuine brand mics from many of the previously listed manufacturers
>> ARE available for around $100.
>
>
> That's accepted. But the suggestion was that those mics are likely not
> made in Germany (or UK, or Austria, or USA).

Nope the original assertion I replied to was those manufacturers "don't make
$100 mics" full stop!
We already know they are made in Mexico, China etc. That does not in itself
make them counterfeit if supplied by the original manufacturer.

Trevor.

[play on]

I guess I'm ressurecting this thread from the dead -- but thought I would add...

A friend of mine brought over his new ADK multi-pattern condenser mic the other day so we could compare it to some more expensive mics, a Geffel M582 with the M7 capsule and a Miktek CV-4. The mic was surprisingly good for the price. It had very full lower mids, used as a drum OH the toms and snare were really fat and meaty. On acoustic guitar, it was not so great, and the high-lift switch when engaged just made the top end sound grainy. Neither of us were singers so it was not tried on vocals but I think it would be a nice thick vocal sound if that's what you were after. Overall, a pretty useful piece of gear for the money (my pal paid around $300 for his new). (I wonder if there are any mods that could help this mic out a little?) One thing that was pretty obvious was that with the ADK the cardiod pattern was less focused than the other condensers we compared it to. As a drum OH there was noticeably more of the room with the ADK.

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 12:58:41 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
>
>
> I just picked up a used ADK S-7 microphone for $150. I'm not familiar with the brand, but it sounded pretty good to me at that price point...so I took the chance and bought it. I see them on-line, going for around $250--$300 new.
>
>
>
> I've only messed with mine a short time. It sounds decent, but does have a significant proximity effect. Once you find the sweet spot, it seems to be a very useable microphone for voiceover type recording. I haven't tried it on singing/vocals yet. Having said that....I'm using a Neumann TLM 170 for vocals & seriously doubt the ADK mic will change that (grin).
>
>
>
> I'll likely keep it. It's no Neumann, but it sounds better than my other 2 "budget" condenser mics. And besides--can you ever really have enough large diaphragm condenser mics in your locker? (ha ha)
>
>
>
> Anyone here use them before? Opinions/comments? It seems to be well made & I'd just like to know more about the brand, etc.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Mike

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

play on wrote:

> I guess I'm ressurecting this thread from the dead -- but thought I
> would add...

> A friend of mine brought over his new ADK multi-pattern condenser mic
> the other day so we could compare it to some more expensive mics, a
> Geffel M582 with the M7 capsule and a Miktek CV-4. The mic was
> surprisingly good for the price. It had very full lower mids, used as
> a drum OH the toms and snare were really fat and meaty. On acoustic
> guitar, it was not so great, and the high-lift switch when engaged
> just made the top end sound grainy. Neither of us were singers so it
> was not tried on vocals but I think it would be a nice thick vocal
> sound if that's what you were after. Overall, a pretty useful piece
> of gear for the money (my pal paid around $300 for his new). (I
> wonder if there are any mods that could help this mic out a little?)
> One thing that was pretty obvious was that with the ADK the cardiod
> pattern was less focused than the other condensers we compared it to.
> As a drum OH there was noticeably more of the room with the ADK.

That is not always just a pattern thing, that is too simple a statement, it
is likely to also be about frequency response, in many contexts it may
indicate a virtue. You omit which microphone it is about and it is left
undefined what pattern you used in what context.

First pattern to try for guitar would imo be fig 8 due to focusing power,
and second imo omni because of transient clarity, depending on context.
Acoustic guitar does not have valid noisy contexts unless equipped with a
pickup, in which case it is may about supplementing with some real "air" and
string noise and drastic high pass filtering of the mic might be acceptable
or even preferable.

You can not always compare microphones fairly just by substituting them in
the same position, you need to deploy them within what their properties
suggest. I don't expect to ever use a large membrane mic for cymbals ...

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> Write to ADK and ask if there's a way to improve it for acoustic
> guitar. Did you try it in any other patterns than cardioid? Larry
> Villella who owns the company is an acoustic guitar player and has
> some pretty nice guitars himself, so he certainly knows how his mics
> sound for that application. They have a custom shop so perhaps
> there's some tweaking they can do for it.

He gives the impression of being a nice helpful kind of guy.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen