Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have been researching the Josephson C42 and Peluso CEMC6 microphones for
use with acoustic instruments. So far the samples I have heard from both are very good and as a general statement, to my ear, the C42 is slightly brighter. They are priced close enough that I could purchase either one but the CEMC6 has removable capsules making them a little more versatile. Has anyone used both of these microphones and if so do you have any opinions? Thanks. Bob |
#2
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Is the workmanship really that bad? The only chinese mic I have is a SP C1
and it's not too bad. Mind you it's never been on the road! "Soundhaspriority" wrote in message ... "Soundhaspriority" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message news:cFB3k.20505$C12.6340@pd7urf3no... I have been researching the Josephson C42 and Peluso CEMC6 microphones for use with acoustic instruments. So far the samples I have heard from both are very good and as a general statement, to my ear, the C42 is slightly brighter. They are priced close enough that I could purchase either one but the CEMC6 has removable capsules making them a little more versatile. Has anyone used both of these microphones and if so do you have any opinions? Thanks. Bob I have not heard them, but from what I know about the construction of the CEMC6, which is shared with a number of very inexpensive Chinese brands, the Peluso must be far superior. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 CORRECTION: The Josephson must be far superior. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 |
#3
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't understand the bad-mouthing of the Peluso. I have a
pair, and I think they are quite good. Great on piano. The construction is nothing to brag about, but the capsule is where it's at, and the Pelusos seem to have their quality put there. The capsule can come off without worry, but I wouldn't do it every day. But then again, I had lots of problems with AKG 451s and their bad threads. Bob seems to hate the wire mesh in the body of the mic, but it could be replaced if it caused you any problems. To me, it sounds way better than the old 451 anytime. I can't compare it to another Chinese mic although I thought it was much better than the Octava sdc. Not as mellow as the Schoeps. Jim Weld "Bob" wrote in message news:XG_3k.25124$gc5.13270@pd7urf2no... Is the workmanship really that bad? The only chinese mic I have is a SP C1 and it's not too bad. Mind you it's never been on the road! "Soundhaspriority" wrote in message ... "Soundhaspriority" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message news:cFB3k.20505$C12.6340@pd7urf3no... I have been researching the Josephson C42 and Peluso CEMC6 microphones for use with acoustic instruments. So far the samples I have heard from both are very good and as a general statement, to my ear, the C42 is slightly brighter. They are priced close enough that I could purchase either one but the CEMC6 has removable capsules making them a little more versatile. Has anyone used both of these microphones and if so do you have any opinions? Thanks. Bob I have not heard them, but from what I know about the construction of the CEMC6, which is shared with a number of very inexpensive Chinese brands, the Peluso must be far superior. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 CORRECTION: The Josephson must be far superior. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS: PELUSO CEMC6 Matched Pair | Pro Audio | |||
FS: Peluso 22-47 **New** | Pro Audio | |||
Peluso CEMC6 opinions | Pro Audio | |||
Peluso Mics | Pro Audio | |||
Peluso mics | Pro Audio |