Some years ago a friend recorded a song using just this mic and a mic-100 tube ultragain (Behringer to) and I really enjoy the result. Nice choice Bro!
I decided to try my B-1 mic on spoken voice (for online communication, or VOIP, perhaps for live streaming). If you do not have sibilant speech sounds (some people have a lot of this in their speaking voice, and high frequency accentuation is not helpful for this) then this likely will sound decent for your speaking voice. It works both near the capsule and also at 2ft to 3ft away (my preferred distance, just due to the way my set up is laid out - basically a four foot wide two monitor setup with a scissors style cheap mic boom at the far right; the mic is basically half way on the right monitor, so about this distance mentioned above). Since this mic has very solid and even lows, and mids, the voice is usually represented decently. I have tried the mic on trombone and frankly it does okay, but I prefer other mics, like the SM57 for that application, probably due to excessive highs.
I enjoyed the clarity of my Behringer B1 but found it always captured siblance in my voice, and maybe distorted slightly on my voice at certain frequencies. I bought a Rode NT1a as a supposed upgrade but so far find it dull and boomy, the exact opposite of what it is promoted as on both voice and acoustic guitar. I keep looking for a shelf switch and even wonder if i have it the wrong way around. Admitedly, working solo i don't experiment much with positioning, but a rough guess was always fine with the behringer. Seems with the Rode I'll need a team of engineers? 😔
Honestly B-1, cheapest and the quality will surprise you. The key difference is that the B-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the B-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between three different polar patterns. Will you need those different polar patterns? That will decide if you need the B-1 or B-2. (for vocals B-1 all the way)
Hey thanks , nice video review! I HAVE ONE QUESTION: I recently re-started recording music in my DAW after a 10 year hiatus, and just yesterday I started to re-use this good B-1 mic that had been sitting on a shelf (in its nice case!) for all this time... It works really fine just like before, BUT... it seems the little elastic cords of the metal shock-mount have lost their strength... to the point that I cannot have the mount hold the mic in a stable way... the elastic cords seem too loose, so I need to attach them to the farther hooks instead of the nearer ones and it seems to be sufficiently semi-stable... so did you experience this problem with this shock-mount yet? Any trick to have this mic hold in a solid stable way with or without the shock-mount (considering the cords are now too loose)?! Thanks!
I bought a bag of hair ties at the dollar store after not finding much on line. I shorten to length by stapling the excess together. Functional, but not aesthetic perhaps.I have tried rubber bands but they stretch too easily.
@@raymota4515 Oh boy what a marvelous tip! Thanks so much, I'll use this trick for sure, the rubber bands didn't do the job for me neither... Yes! my mic will be stable once again, thanks for your useful reply!
The key difference is that the TM-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the TM-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between three different polar patterns. Will you need those different polar patterns? That will decide if you need the B2 pro of TM-1
Oh Thank you very much, I’m actually a vocalist that sings on the high ends better and I’m trying to find the best low budget microphone for my voice which microphone will you advice for me
B-1 is the cheapest and in terms of audio quality it’s really the same. The key difference is that the B-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the B-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between two different polar patterns (cardioid and omnidirectional, the B-2 is like having two microphones in one). So it terms of uses, the B2 is more flexible but audio quality is the same.
Good video !! Thanks for the information. I suspect that the B1 is actually a C1 with a larger diaphram (26mm vs 14mm) and a couple of switches for roll off and attenuation. I've enjoyed using the C1 (Contrary to Behringer's advertising it's not a large diaphram.) The B1 looks great. If you're curious, here's a recording that features the C1, with a Behringer UMC202HD interface. ruclips.net/video/kRU2KlbIA0g/видео.html
I've used a pair of B-1s since 2003. Nice response, crisp and clear. Still using them in 2023. Still crisp and clear.
I always end up going back to them, I’ve tried other microphones but these just take the cake!
I am using b1 for vocal recording.I am fully satisfied with it.doesnt need much eq.great mic
Still using it to this day for voice work, so underrated
Some years ago a friend recorded a song using just this mic and a mic-100 tube ultragain (Behringer to) and I really enjoy the result. Nice choice Bro!
I decided to try my B-1 mic on spoken voice (for online communication, or VOIP, perhaps for live streaming). If you do not have sibilant speech sounds (some people have a lot of this in their speaking voice, and high frequency accentuation is not helpful for this) then this likely will sound decent for your speaking voice. It works both near the capsule and also at 2ft to 3ft away (my preferred distance, just due to the way my set up is laid out - basically a four foot wide two monitor setup with a scissors style cheap mic boom at the far right; the mic is basically half way on the right monitor, so about this distance mentioned above). Since this mic has very solid and even lows, and mids, the voice is usually represented decently. I have tried the mic on trombone and frankly it does okay, but I prefer other mics, like the SM57 for that application, probably due to excessive highs.
I enjoyed the clarity of my Behringer B1 but found it always captured siblance in my voice, and maybe distorted slightly on my voice at certain frequencies. I bought a Rode NT1a as a supposed upgrade but so far find it dull and boomy, the exact opposite of what it is promoted as on both voice and acoustic guitar. I keep looking for a shelf switch and even wonder if i have it the wrong way around. Admitedly, working solo i don't experiment much with positioning, but a rough guess was always fine with the behringer. Seems with the Rode I'll need a team of engineers? 😔
Lewitt 440 and the lewitt pencil mic for the guitar. I did the same with behringer, but Lewitt is cleaner.
Ty you for such. Great video Joey 👍🏻.
I love behringer, they got me started! Buy a UMC404HD external Soundcard for studio use, that rocks!
Thanks for the recommendation! :)
I wonder how this microphone would do micing a live bluegrass band in quieter venues compared to something like the ear trumpet.
I think it would perform well, it is a very good all round microphone, I tend to only have to add a bit of warmth to it
Do you think it works well also with accoustic AND singing voice ?
It does! I’ve used it for vocals that have gone on the radio, you have to warm up the mids a bit with EQ but other then that, Gold 👌
Behringer B1 vs B2 vs B2 pro ?
Want to buy one and some other equipments to start recording myself by myself
Honestly B-1, cheapest and the quality will surprise you. The key difference is that the B-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the B-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between three different polar patterns. Will you need those different polar patterns? That will decide if you need the B-1 or B-2. (for vocals B-1 all the way)
@@Joe-blogcomposer thanks a lot for the insight
@@Joe-blogcomposerthanks for the tip
gosh, that background music... is the microphone dying?
Hey thanks , nice video review! I HAVE ONE QUESTION: I recently re-started recording music in my DAW after a 10 year hiatus, and just yesterday I started to re-use this good B-1 mic that had been sitting on a shelf (in its nice case!) for all this time... It works really fine just like before, BUT... it seems the little elastic cords of the metal shock-mount have lost their strength... to the point that I cannot have the mount hold the mic in a stable way... the elastic cords seem too loose, so I need to attach them to the farther hooks instead of the nearer ones and it seems to be sufficiently semi-stable... so did you experience this problem with this shock-mount yet? Any trick to have this mic hold in a solid stable way with or without the shock-mount (considering the cords are now too loose)?! Thanks!
I bought a bag of hair ties at the dollar store after not finding much on line. I shorten to length by stapling the excess together. Functional, but not aesthetic perhaps.I have tried rubber bands but they stretch too easily.
@@raymota4515 Oh boy what a marvelous tip! Thanks so much, I'll use this trick for sure, the rubber bands didn't do the job for me neither... Yes! my mic will be stable once again, thanks for your useful reply!
Do i need audio interface the red one ? I have phantom power adapter 48v only china brand
You will need something to provide phantom power
Beringer B-1 vs Tascam TM-180?
I think the TM-80 might be a closer head to head
Do you advice a b2-pro over TM-1
The key difference is that the TM-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the TM-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between three different polar patterns. Will you need those different polar patterns? That will decide if you need the B2 pro of TM-1
Oh Thank you very much, I’m actually a vocalist that sings on the high ends better and I’m trying to find the best low budget microphone for my voice which microphone will you advice for me
Wondering could I use this as a singing microphone and does it need 48v phantom power.
Yes you can! And yes it does need Phantom
How does the B2 (not B2Pro) compare to the B1?
B-1 is the cheapest and in terms of audio quality it’s really the same. The key difference is that the B-1 has one diaphragm while the B-2 has two. This means the B-1 permanently has a cardioid pickup pattern, while the B-2 is switchable between two different polar patterns (cardioid and omnidirectional, the B-2 is like having two microphones in one). So it terms of uses, the B2 is more flexible but audio quality is the same.
Is a TM-1 better
Honestly b1, put them side by side and you’ll notice little if any difference, but the B1 is cheaper.
Good video !! Thanks for the information. I suspect that the B1 is actually a C1 with a larger diaphram (26mm vs 14mm) and a couple of switches for roll off and attenuation. I've enjoyed using the C1 (Contrary to Behringer's advertising it's not a large diaphram.) The B1 looks great. If you're curious, here's a recording that features the C1, with a Behringer UMC202HD interface. ruclips.net/video/kRU2KlbIA0g/видео.html
I see large and small as the usual call out for condenser diaphram sizes. I use Large, medium, small and tiny because I think it's more descriptive.