I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use, so I'm looking at these two mics as replacements. I know there
are better, but between these two, in terms of sound and versatility,
any recommendations? I will mostly be using it for soft vocals,
voiceovers, and acoustic guitar. Looking over posts here, you guys seem
to like the at2020; however the nt1-a seems to get better reviews than
most othe mics in its range. Feel free to suggest mics near these price
ranges. Thanks -- Matt

"Matt" wrote in message
oups.com...
I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use, so I'm looking at these two mics as replacements. I know there
are better, but between these two, in terms of sound and versatility,
any recommendations? I will mostly be using it for soft vocals,
voiceovers, and acoustic guitar. Looking over posts here, you guys seem
to like the at2020; however the nt1-a seems to get better reviews than
most othe mics in its range. Feel free to suggest mics near these price
ranges. Thanks -- Matt

Soft vocals ? Mmmh. Well the NT1-a is possibly the quietest condenser mic
in the world ....

geoff

PS Sounds quite good too.

In article .com writes:

I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use

You'll be getting it fixed under warranty, won't you? Or did it break
when you hit it with a drumstick or dropped it on the floor?

Surely it's worth sending it back to wherever you have to send it, if
only to be able to sell it in working condition.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

I got it on ebay, so even if I had the warrenty material, I got it for
so cheap that it doesn't matter. -- Matt

In article .com writes:

I got it on ebay, so even if I had the warrenty material, I got it for
so cheap that it doesn't matter. -- Matt

Nice to see that some people think that just because something is
cheap, it's disposable. But I guess we're talking about a Behringer
mic here.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Nice to see that some people think that just because something is
cheap, it's disposable.

If it's cheaper to replace than to repair, it's disposable. If it was
cheaper to buy originally than to repair... well, that's a matter of how
you run your budget and whether you need to replace it immediately.

Budgeting's an engineering exercise. Multiple solutions are possible;
use what works best for your application.

Matt wrote:

I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use, so I'm looking at these two mics as replacements. I know there
are better, but between these two, in terms of sound and versatility,
any recommendations? I will mostly be using it for soft vocals,
voiceovers, and acoustic guitar. Looking over posts here, you guys seem
to like the at2020; however the nt1-a seems to get better reviews than
most othe mics in its range. Feel free to suggest mics near these price
ranges. Thanks -- Matt

If you're having durability issues I would
look to the company that has the better
reputation for reliability. It may be a
little early to tell in regard to the AT2020,
but I haven't heard of any particular problems
with either Rode or AT.
I have mics that I have been using since the
early '70s without any failures, you may want
to review your methods and environments for
causes. Are these used outdoors for SR ?

Both the 2020 and the NT1A are decent mics
and good values. If the choice were mine I
most likely would take the Rode based on it
being externally polarized. (the 2020 is an
electret) Not that there is anything wrong
with permanently charged caps, there are plenty
of good ones out there.

Also look into CAD mics such as the M177, M179, etc.

rd

In article ,
Joe Kesselman wrote:

Nice to see that some people think that just because something is
cheap, it's disposable.

If it's cheaper to replace than to repair, it's disposable. If it was
cheaper to buy originally than to repair... well, that's a matter of how
you run your budget and whether you need to replace it immediately.

Budgeting's an engineering exercise. Multiple solutions are possible;
use what works best for your application.


Brings to mind an old joke...

A Scottish military officer strolls into an apothecary shop. From the
pouch hanging from his kilt he extracts a used condom and places it upon
the counter.

The apothecary says, "Hoot man, wat be this ye'r thrustin' before me?"

"T'is a condom, sir, and I've come t' ask ye; hey much to replace it
and hey much to repair it?"

"Aye," replies the apothecary, as he examines the condom, "T'would be
six pence to replace it and thra' pence, heypenny to repair it."

"Thank ye," says the Scottish military officer as he picks up the used
condom and puts it back into his pouch, then marches out of the shop.

The next morning the military officer returns to the apothecary shop. He
reaches into his pouch, pulls out the used condom and tosses it onto the
counter.

"The regiment has voted to repair," he says.

--
Brendan Doyle

In article writes:

If it's cheaper to replace than to repair, it's disposable. If it was
cheaper to buy originally than to repair... well, that's a matter of how
you run your budget and whether you need to replace it immediately.

Unless Behringer mics have some unreasonably short warranty period or
unreasonably ****y warranty policy (only good for the original owner,
with a certified copy of the sales receipt and retina print of the
sales clerk) there's a good chance that repair will cost no more than
one-way shipping. I would at least inquire.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 21:09:48 -0400, Matt wrote
(in article .com):

I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use, so I'm looking at these two mics as replacements. I know there
are better, but between these two, in terms of sound and versatility,
any recommendations? I will mostly be using it for soft vocals,
voiceovers, and acoustic guitar. Looking over posts here, you guys seem
to like the at2020; however the nt1-a seems to get better reviews than
most othe mics in its range. Feel free to suggest mics near these price
ranges. Thanks -- Matt


AT 2020 or NT2-a, skip the one.

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 04:59:04 -0400, Geoff Wood wrote
(in article ):


"Matt" wrote in message
oups.com...
I had a used behringer condenser that broke after an inspiring 4 weeks
of use, so I'm looking at these two mics as replacements. I know there
are better, but between these two, in terms of sound and versatility,
any recommendations? I will mostly be using it for soft vocals,
voiceovers, and acoustic guitar. Looking over posts here, you guys seem
to like the at2020; however the nt1-a seems to get better reviews than
most othe mics in its range. Feel free to suggest mics near these price
ranges. Thanks -- Matt

Soft vocals ? Mmmh. Well the NT1-a is possibly the quietest condenser mic
in the world ....

geoff

PS Sounds quite good too.



Quiet? as in not sensitive or as in low self noise?

If the latter, quieter than the TLM 103 after adjusting for sensitivity
differences? I don't know of a mic off hand that's any quieter than a TLM 103
and is as sensitive at the same time. I think the NT2-a may come close, but I
haven't thought to compare them recently.

Both more expensive than the AT 2020.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Ty Ford wrote:

If the latter, quieter than the TLM 103 after adjusting for sensitivity
differences?

What are the dBA noise specs of each? Comparing them,
difference in sensitivity is factored out.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 02:46:01 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):



Ty Ford wrote:

If the latter, quieter than the TLM 103 after adjusting for sensitivity
differences?

What are the dBA noise specs of each? Comparing them,
difference in sensitivity is factored out.


Bob


That's not my experience. The TLM 103 has a 7 dB a selfnoise but it also is a
LOT more sensitive than some other mics. The two, together, make it quite
amazing at recording quiet things.

T yFord



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Ty Ford wrote:

That's not my experience. The TLM 103 has a 7 dB a selfnoise but it also is a
LOT more sensitive than some other mics. The two, together, make it quite
amazing at recording quiet things.

Experience aside, if two mics have the same dBA (sound
pressure equivalent) noise measurement, the only thing a
lower sensitivity could effect is revealing more pre amp
noise and this only with a noisy pre amp.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:04:15 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):



Ty Ford wrote:

That's not my experience. The TLM 103 has a 7 dB a selfnoise but it also is
a
LOT more sensitive than some other mics. The two, together, make it quite
amazing at recording quiet things.

Experience aside, if two mics have the same dBA (sound
pressure equivalent) noise measurement, the only thing a
lower sensitivity could effect is revealing more pre amp
noise and this only with a noisy pre amp.


Bob

If both mics have the same selfnoise, but one is more sensitive than the
other, you need to turn the lower one up with preamp gain to match teh more
sensitive one. As you do that, you do get preamp noise but you also get more
selfnoise.

Ty Ford






-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Ty Ford wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:04:15 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):



Ty Ford wrote:


That's not my experience. The TLM 103 has a 7 dB a selfnoise but it also is
a
LOT more sensitive than some other mics. The two, together, make it quite
amazing at recording quiet things.

Experience aside, if two mics have the same dBA (sound
pressure equivalent) noise measurement, the only thing a
lower sensitivity could effect is revealing more pre amp
noise and this only with a noisy pre amp.


Bob


If both mics have the same selfnoise, but one is more sensitive than the
other, you need to turn the lower one up with preamp gain to match teh more
sensitive one. As you do that, you do get preamp noise but you also get more
selfnoise.

You also get more signal in equal proportion. If a pre has
low enough noise and the mic's self noise is given in dBA
sensitivity is irrelevant. If two mics have the same self
noise in dBA but different sensitivities, turning up the
gain of the lower to make the signals equal will make the
noise equal too. I.e., specifying self noise in dBA removes
sensitivity from consideration in determining how much noise
there will be in a signal of a given SPL. Just subtract the
former from the latter to get SNR. That's the whole point
in specifying self noise in SPL equivalent dBA. Were it
specified in dBV then sensitivity would have to be accounted
for in figuring out the SNR.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

"Ty Ford" wrote in message

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:04:15 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):



Ty Ford wrote:

That's not my experience. The TLM 103 has a 7 dB a
selfnoise but it also is a
LOT more sensitive than some other mics. The two,
together, make it quite amazing at recording quiet
things.

Experience aside, if two mics have the same dBA (sound
pressure equivalent) noise measurement, the only thing a
lower sensitivity could effect is revealing more pre amp
noise and this only with a noisy pre amp.


Bob

If both mics have the same selfnoise, but one is more
sensitive than the other, you need to turn the lower one
up with preamp gain to match teh more sensitive one. As
you do that, you do get preamp noise but you also get
more selfnoise.

Not if the selfnoise is given as a SPL.

If two mics have the same selfnoise, the less sensitive mic
puts out a corresponding lower noise voltage. Then when you
turn the less sensiitive mic up for the reference signal,
its selfnoise will be the same voltage as the more sensitive
mic.