Microphone Companies Are Lying To You
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 июл 2024
- Huge thanks to Nick and Alfie for playing and an additional thanks to Lucy for helping film as well as Sam and Alex for also donating their iPhones for the demo!
SONGS:
LEMONADE by Solar Jam:
open.spotify.com/track/5qGPmq...
ON & ON by Lucy Hill
open.spotify.com/track/3NxOiI...
GEAR:
Lewitt LCT 440 Pure: amzn.to/4bITUfw
Behringer UMC404HD: amzn.to/4bl0rgJ
MULTITRACKS:
drive.google.com/drive/folder...
Intro (0:00)
The Plan (0:26)
Raw Comparison (1:41 )
AI EQ Match (2:19)
Blind Test (3:30)
Drum Mics VS iPhones(!?) (3:55)
1 iPhone + Samples (5:19)
iPhone EQ Match (5:34)
A/B TEST RESULTS REVEAL:
*please note there are 194 comments currently and not one person has guessed which is which - if I see a guess after this I will assume you have just read the answer haha :)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A was the Lewitts
B was the Subzeros
Audio tech with 47 years of experience here. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Frequency response, which you inaccurately describe as "EQ," is only the most easily-heard difference between microphones. You're completely discounting polar pattern, off-axis response, sensitivity (which affects noise levels), self-noise, EMF rejection, harmonic distortion, phase errors, the coloration of electronic components within the microphone, resonances, differences in proximity effect, effects of preamplifier input stage loading, effects of self-impedance (these last two are related), plosive rejection, handling noise, maximum SPL, and many more less-easily quantifiable differences between mics. Hell, even identical designs can sound identifiably different between samples. Just because YOU cannot hear the differences, or just because some of those differences might not be audible after being lossy-encoded two or three times in a RUclips video and then being played back on a phone and a $5 set of earbuds, does not mean the differences are not there. And the fact that two mics might sound similar on a lone voice does not mean they'll sound anything alike recording say, a string section in an orchestra.
As for drums, close-micing of drums always requires massive EQ or specially-designed mics, because no one listens to drums by putting their ears an inch away from the edge of the head of the drum. This practice came from the early days of multi-track recording, where producers insisted on having complete control over the sound of each individual drum in a kit, so they placed mics as close to each one as possible. It sounded horrible, naturally, but that's what those massive EQ sections on consoles were for, right? Try putting a Blumlein pair of mics six feet away from the drum kit, and use nothing else. Then you'll see what your drums (and mics, and room) really sound like.
I'm not saying that microphone companies don't lie to make money - all businesses do that to some extent. But your premise is faulty, and should not be disseminated as truth.
Yeah so I was trying to look at just “tone” which is kind of vague but I mean it as not considering SPL, noise, polar pattern etc. just one source in front of mic not clipping. If you want to listen to the multitracks on studio monitors without the compression from RUclips the multitracks are in the description!
But also this isn’t a hill I’m willing to die on - I think there’s no doubt more nuance to the differences in mics (and I imagine I’ll watch this video back in 10 years and think wow they sound so different what was I thinking). But for the time being they sound close enough to identical (for me and anyone else that was watching and thought the same) that buying new mics probably isn’t sensible 🤣
Out of interest what’s your guess for the AB comparison in a mix? (obviously if you can’t identify which is which that doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t sound different etc it’d just be interesting)
@@JacobdeJongh I don't hear a big difference in the drums - I assume that's the only part that's being AB'd - but as I said, close mic'd drums rely totally on EQ and signal processing to sound good, so it's kind of a wash from the get-go. I might download the tracks and listen to them in my DAW later this week, and see how they sound alone, and without lossy compression.
An idea for a second video - do basically the same thing again, but this time, record male and female singing voices. Record the tracks with no processing at all, and then show the audience the difference that post-production processing makes by letting them hear the raw and finished tracks for each mic.
In any case, this was a great video for someone with only 300+ subs, and my hope is that your channel grows quickly. I'm now subscriber #330, BTW.
I probs won’t make another video on it but I reckon I’ll do some testing behind the scenes :))
Thanks man - I really appreciate it!!
You're 100% correct, most newbies think that EQ fixes everything not relaxing that EQ introduces phase shift and other artifacts and linear EQ introduces pre-ringing. So even if the difference between all mics was just the EQ, you still won't be able to make them sound the same with EQ
Yes
This was awesome! I'm really glad the RUclips algo has started to put an emphasis on lower view videos. Not only was this super interesting from a technical perspective, but the discovery of Lucy Hill is a major plus. On & On is incredible!
Dude - thank you!!! I’m actually at a gig with Lucy right now and she says thank you haha (and that there’s more music coming 🤣)
interesting idea. but to be honest, you proofed that they are more than just one eq move appart.
1. in order to eq match, you would need always the better mics as the refference.
2. if you listen to your comparison 2:32 you hear their transient responce is different. the lewitts are more snappy.
3. you said yourself , that the cheaper snare mic has more hihat bleed in it. it may come down to a slightly different position, or that the polarpattern are not the same.
Good to hear the feedback!
1) absolutely- I don’t intend on matching my mics to other mics in future, just testing out of interest/to know if it’s really worth buying expensive mics
2) They’re definitely not identical, I’d be interested to here which mics you thought were which in the AB test
3) yeah the polar patterns being the same is going to massively affect how similar two mics sound, but it’s also not the case that the polar pattern is linked to price: there are plenty of affordable mics with the polar pattern you’re looking for :)
100% In a mix, you will not be able to tell a difference.
Different mics will take eq differently, some more easy than others, Especially with sibilance when you compress it in a mix. So i think youll actually tell more the difference in a mic in a mix. because the thing you record need to sit in the mix properly, and with all the details adding up.
If you have one track. But if you have many tracks recorded with a particular mic the difference will be very obvious
Bro forgot to talk about 1: material quality 2: self noise 3: design 4: marketing
Yeah all super important things no doubt - I just wanted to focus on “tone” but there are lots of other necessary considerations for buying mics :)
Another point is, many cheap brands models are actually using the same parts as expensive ones, and just reduce costs on quality checks and looks. Some of them are actually getting out of the same manufacturies.
Famous example is Behringer producinfg the circuits boards for Boss.
Off axis colouration.distortion, phase distortion, self-noise level, diffuse field response, sensitivity, ( admittedly none of these matter masively on drums), EQ cannot fix these.Try micing up a Lowden guitar and tell me a cheap Chinese electret can sound the same as Neumann Km54 or a Telefunken ELAM 260 just using FabFilter. Now, if you're after a lo-fi sound then go for an SM57 or even a D12 kick mic (did that once on a V. expensive 1950's Martin). Just remember - there no such thing as a 'bad' sound - just a sound that doesn't fit.
This musical youth is a genius! I can’t believe he actually got the drummer from Solar Jam to perform. Excellent and helpful video.
Honestly, give the guy a break (I’m talking to you, nasty “experts”, who obviously have nothing better to do than be rude). I disagree with your conclusion and premise but nonetheless, you do show how easily our brains deceive us about what we think were hearing. Just last night, I made a nice eq move, only to realise the plug in was turned off so in fact there could have been no difference. BUT cheap mics have all sorts of other limitations - weird resonances, problems with transients, noise, reliability over time, etc.
Aside from this, the other issue I have with your video is the conclusion that we are being lied to. Learning good audio skills is a very long game. Some suppliers are certainly milking their reputation, as do car manufacturers, for example, but then again they have stood the test of time and there are usually very sound, if not entirely definable reasons for this. Keep making great videos and testing ideas but watch the claims you make.
Dude THANK YOU!! I really appreciate such a kind/thoughtful comment - it’s tricky to communicate/anticipate the level of nuance I want/need before seeing the feedback and while also making a compelling/entertaining video but I hope that the A/B testing in itself brought enough value to people - more than anything I just want to encourage people to use their ears to make judgements :))
i would be interested in getting a number of the cheap kits and finding out if there is differences in sound between the same mics... perhaps some "sound better" than others
Of course mics can be EQ'd. No one on Earth is debating that microphones can be EQ'd to sound similar to another. There is a ton that goes into what makes a microphone good for a situation or not. Polar patters, and how accurate are they? Rejection. Resonance. Proximity effect. Handling noise and resonance from the room. Off axis tonality. Phase between multiples of the same mic.
Yeah I'm with you 100%. And all those features you described aren't really linked to price which I was kind of trying to get at - picking the right type of mic is really important, spending thousands of pounds on one because you think the tone is somehow magical is absolutely not.
@@JacobdeJongh High prices are generally for features, extreme tolerance, consistency throughout the entire line, country of origin, and being handmade.
I would be the first to say that most people don't need any expensive audio equipment. I own commercial recording studios, and I've worked in many, many other commercial studios. We pay for expensive equipment, because they're extremely consistent across the line and reliable from session to session year after year.
Most people have no business spending money on commercial level gear when their day to day use case doesn't come close to the same threshold. They will never have 48 open mics up at the same time in a tracking session, all of which needing to have proper gain structure, rejection, off axis and phase coherence.
I would also add that many of the features I listed in my original comment do cost substantially more than cheap microphones.
Just getting rid of handling noise is expensive. They have to start with a solid homogenous bar of material that was annealed and then they mill out the inside for the body of the mic. Cheap mics are ready made made through casting which has a rigid crystalline structure which transmits vibrations and resonance throughout the body. They're also usually thinner and less equipped for high level RF rejection.
100% handmade capsules are very much the same way vs cheap mass produced ones. Milling vs casting in capsules has an extreme performance difference.
As it turns out all of these things add up to a better sounding microphone as well as consistency and durability. However most people absolutely DO NOT need these pieces of gear.
Really good info, I don't know why no one has done this before.
Great video! Well done for debunking the myth that you need expensive mics to make great recordings. People can talk all they like about self noise, (doesn't matter with loud instruments) build quality, (doesn't matter if the mics are looked after in a studio) etc etc. I could barely hear the difference and if you're straining to hear it, it really isn't going to affect the impact of the music and that is what all this gear is supposed to be about. Well done again!
Thanks man, appreciate it! Yep exactly, lots of people bringing up stuff that doesn't have anything to do with the tone of the mic haha. Glad you enjoyed :)
imo, ive noticed the biggest differences are the consistency of the polar pattern across the frequency spectrum, as well as self-noise (even with dynamic mics. 200-ohm neodymium magnet mics vs 600-ohm mics really brings the hiss/noise into perspective and is much more noticeable on things like human speech vs a loud-af drumkit
What happened to the kick with the EQ matched iPhone? It didn't sound like that in the earlier example. Did you just completely replace it with a sample?
Nah no sample - I think they were just so different that the EQ match was super aggressive so made it sound pretty weird
I think in certain applications you will notice differences in dynamic range depending on several factors, but I gotta say I am impressed with how similar they actually sound.
not an audio expert, i bought a bunch of mics because it's something i like as a hobby. sensitivity, polar-pattern (& off-axis coloration), noise and just simple build quality are huge differences between mics. (also impedance requirements). and there is plenty others.
but yeah, you don't need expensive mics to do music, it's been shown plenty of times. even cheap mics nowadays are really good.
Whats funny is that I was like "thats a shotgun mic reflection" and then you said "I lied" and i was like "Rango"
Brilliant video! Really enjoyed it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Great vid. I'd be interested in seeing the processing, EQ etc you applied to the tracks please
I’ll have a look today and let you know what the main cuts/boosts were!!
Thanks!!
My speakers are really nice. I did not tell a difference between the drum mics really.
This is an awesome comparison! Thanks a lot for putting together this video, it's very useful (and fun).
After EQ I cant tell the difference at all. And if any mic can be turned into any other mic with EQ, then it really doesn't matter which mic is used (for the home studio enthusiast).
Awesome.
Nice video man!
You can tell a difference in mics, I could through out the whole video but for beginning bands, not so serious (fun) artists, and some decently serious, it's not a big deal to use cheaper vs more expensive. In the final mix, you can basically make a 50$ mic sound like a 400$ mic and so on. If the engineer knows what they're doing, that is.
But in all, use what you can people! Create and share the work :D
Thanks man!! Appreciate the support and I love your attitude :) Making music >>>> saving to buy gear 🤣
@@JacobdeJongh For sure man! lol & Subbed btw. Keep the videos coming!
I do hear a difference in higher end mics, but great preamps are almost more important than mics nowadays.
7 i-phones would cost much more than a £999 drum mic kit.
Haha yeah definitely NOT a good investment for a studio 🤣🤣 also sounded way worse lmao
True to an extent aside from things like transient response, off axis rejection, etc. BUT here’s the thing: you’d have to have nice mics to EQ match to. Otherwise it’s gonna take a looooooot of time and effort to guess.
Yeah there’s definitely nuance and EQ matching for every single thing would take forever 🤣🤣
This is an interesting theory and probably with some different test methods I could see an argument being made. I listened to this video on my phones speakers and could hear very noticeable differences in the A/B testing.
The frequency’s are hitting different
Antares does make a plugin called Mic Mod which just lets you choose your mic from a list and you choose what mic you want the plugin to simulate like a U87 and it is $150, cheaper than ozone but I don't think it applies for drum mics.
Oooh that’s fun - I’ll give it a try!
@@JacobdeJongh btw just checked and right now its on sale for $75!
And it’s lacks the non linear harmonics
Wow super high quality! Thought you had 318k subs!!
Thanks man! Hopefully one day 🤣
the kick on the phones file was proper grim
yeah haha should've put a warning lmao it's unlistenable
This video *about* Audio has desynced audio and video. At least in the first part.
Nah the audio is fine just the video is desynced 👍
@@JacobdeJonghjust admit you don't really know what you're talking about😂 EQ is the last thing you care about when comparing mics
@@ELSEBA.RECORDS which was which in the blind test then?
I really like the B variant of the mix, which microphones are these?
B was the Subzeros!! I prefer them too I think, there’s just a tiny extra bit of brightness that helps them cut through :)
Great video! You might consider picking up a copy of Antares Mic Mod. It's a great plugin. Also, you might consider picking up a UA Sphere DLX if you can swing it. I sold mine recenlty (prefered the high end mics in real life) but it's an awesome jumping off point for "taste testing."
Dude thank you!! I’ll check them both out :)
thanks!
I might not have as much experience in music production, however bcuz i always have budget constraints i always find myself having to come up w ways to get a good sound without spending much money especially cuz i live in a country w a weak currency, so any "budget" gears out there still required me to give up my meals for a full yr, i learned smtg important from the very start
N that is, the biggest difference between a cheap item/gear w an expensive one is convenience. If u have budget constraints, that means u need to put more effort to get a good sound, wether its post-processing or spending extra time browsing thru online shops to find the cheapest usable gear. Whilst more expensive gears tend to alr sound good from the start, n i guess this might just be my lack of experience but in the limited times i used more expensive gears (professional level mics, tube amps, drum kits w pro level mics, pro level audio interfaces n mixers, etc), it tends to not rly sound that good if i apply that same amount of processing that i have w cheaper gears, n its usually best to keep it as simple n linear as possible (which i know is the golden rule of mixing n mastering anw).
And this video actually confirms my "theory" i guess u could call it that, n i guess its just a matter of which poison do u pick??? Do u wanna go that extra mile so u can save ur money for smtg else??? Or do u wanna instead spend that extra maybe 15-30 or maybe all the way to 100 bucks or so, just for the sake of convenience??? And ofc u also had to bear in mind which limitations u had, whether ur budget is limited or ur free time is limited n made a decision accordingly
Yeah really well said! Most of what expensive gear brings is just that convenience, great recording engineers with cheap gear will make a better record than an inexperienced engineer with expensive gear every time. If you’ve got more money than time then expensive gear 100% makes sense but if things are tight OR you don’t yet have the ears for it to make a difference cheap gear wins 💪💪
4:00 YOU ABSOLUTE MAD LAD
Lmaoo hahah this made me laugh 🤣
I have a set of those subzeros. The only let down in those is the pencils. Lewits 040s aint that expensive to add.
Yeah for live stuff I’ll use 57 on the snare, subzeros for toms and Samson c02s for overheads - works great!
Cool vid! Reminds me of Jim Lill's video "Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?" where he basically proves different wood types make no difference to electric guitar tone
This was inspired by his video on mics!! Towards the end he uses Ozone match EQ for like 3 seconds and I was shocked it was just skimmed over like that so made this video!
It's really hard to differentiate both mics from each other because both are likely similarly constructed mics and usually drums use extreme eq paters, so it should be easy enough to match them, so yeah, don't buy expensive drum mics, we agree (maybe good overhead drum mics is a good idea). But when we talk about more instruments that require a more natural or specific sound, you won't be able to match them with only eq because of the mic body acoustics that create phase differences in different frequency ranges, harmonic distortion, different transit response, self-noise, body resonances, etc, and EQ plugins eq with phase, so by EQing the mic with conventional eq plugins, you will create phase differences.
When I was starting I had the exact same thought, so I found the frequency response (FR) of my Lewitt LCT240 (the OG not the pro) and tried to match it with a U87, I got somewhat of a similar tone but it just did not feel the same, it is very frustrating to mix cheap mics because they would often just won't fit in the mix. It worked fine with some male voices but not so fine with other female voices even matching the FR.
Many companies use the same logic for their mics, for example, Behringer. The Behringer C-1 has a very similar frequency response as the Neumann U87, but it doesn't sound nearly as good, why? because of the body resonances, the circuits and body that create phase issues in different frequency ranges, super noisy, and awful build quality. Don't get me wrong, it is a cheap mic but you can do great stuff with it if you use it right. but it won't be the same.
HOWEVER! If we built a microphone with perfectly flat FR, no harmonic distortion, perfect phase response, super low self-noise, linear transit response, cero body resonances, etc... We could theoretically build a plugin/app that could simulate most of those things, though the phase and transit response might be super complex to simulate.
UAD, Slate Digital, Antelope Audio, IK Multimedia, and others, have mics and/or software that do that, but because of the nature of the mics, we are not there yet, we are like 70% there I'd say, lol.
In the audio community often we don't suggest you buy the most expensive mics, there are $3k to $12k mics that for the 95% are not worth it at all, and there are many $100 to $500 that will do 90% what those 12k mics do, you just have to choose right. Alternatively, you could build your own mic from $50 to $500 and get the same level of quality as those 12k mics.
I Liked your video a lot, keep it up, you have a new subscriber here!
Yeah I suspect on an acoustic guitar or piano the results would be wildly different, but as you say drum mics (especially close mics) probably don't need a great deal of money invested into them :)
2:02 LOL!! The SubZero sounds WAY better on that paricular tom than the Lewitt does xD. Not kidding! :O
I thought so too haha was not expecting it
@@JacobdeJongh :D Just listened to the examples once more and I've gotta say those SubZero mics sound better to my ears overall. It's just my opinion though. :) Maybe my ears suck LOL
The thing about good mics is to save time Eqing during the mix. But getting a good sound with a cheap mic is good.
5:30 that sounded solid, MOST records have drums with samples layered in to beef the drums up.
It’s crazy right - iPhone and some samples are good enough for record quality drums! What a lovely time to be alive and recording music :)
Cool experiment you did there especially with the iPhones. As someone who started with an old korg digital 4-track with a built in mic knowing my single iPhone could do a better job today I had thought about a similar experiment but didn’t have the means to do it. My take is that of course microphones make a difference but the key is how much does that actually matter to the average listener? The answer I think is less and less as time goes on. Back in the day it was much more important to get the sound right going into the tape and the best engineers would try and get the closest representation to what’s actually being heard in the room. These days the tools are getting so good that the old adage of “you can’t polish a turd” I think is becoming less and less true. That being said I did notice a difference in the blind test and I think A had cleaner detail in the cymbals and high end while B started to sound a bit washy and not quite as pleasant. Another thing to consider is Ozone is taking up another 400 dollars of your budget here unless you got a deal. I think the main takeaway which you aptly demonstrate here is that you can still get a passable result with a lot less money spent. If the drummer sucked and played bad drums that are not tuned properly and/or in a shitty room on the best microphones in the world it would still sound bad but a really good drummer on a good kit in a somewhat ok sounding room, and the song is really good could still make a commercially successful record with the cheap mics or even the iPhones.
My favourite comment so far - couldn't agree more! Especially about the polishing a turd (as long as the performance is good). And yeah, I'm super lucky to have such awesome drummers readily available to me :))
I wish it was that easy. LOL
5:39 Oh LOL.... this reminds me of Dream Theater's 6 o'clock drum fill into. :P
I only have live sound experience and there is a huge difference between sensitivity, distortion, dynamic range and sound.
Out of interest (and I realise you may have seen the answer in the pinned comment) which do you think is which in the blind A/B?
@@JacobdeJongh So I agree with the fact that on this highly compressed youtube recording there is almost no audible difference. Almost. If I try really hard I heard a bit less detail on the cymbals on B.
Note: I wrote this before I looked at the results.
There is a difference in regards to the quality of the mics. But with that caveat you're right most Mike's sound almost the same. But the difference comes to play with different sound pressure levels differences in frequency responses at least this is what I found with different mics. True I don't think it's necessary to buy a 3000 or 10,000 microphone but I think that there's a lot of microphones in the sub 100 and maybe the 500 dollar range that sounds outstanding
Yep spot on - I think up to £1k there are loads of mics that are absolutely worth the money, and there are likely dirt cheap mics that are unreliable… it’s when it’s starts costing lots more that I think it gets silly 😅
Very interesting comparison, especially with the iPhones! :D I'm surprised how similar the more affordable close mics sound the the Lewitt. At 2:53 the biggest difference I could hear is the pre-ringing (a little frequency build up right in front of each drum hit) in the cheaper mics caused from the filters of the match eq. If you listen closely at the last snare drum hit for example (2:56) it's the most audible :)
That’s such a good catch!!! Yeah I think the boosting from the EQ made the bleed more noticeable so whenever the gates opened on the drums you can hear the ringing before the hit - less lookahead on the gates probably would’ve reduced it a bit(?)
The thing here is the mixes even with the good mics sound bad , that’s why there’s very little difference between expensive and cheap mics
I like the skeptical thinking, definitely way to go in my opinion, nothing should stop you to make the best out of what you can do. But technically it's not just about tonal balance, it's more like capsule scheme and circuitry response, tonal and dynamic, it changes not only the frequency response, but noise floor, bleed and distortion. Is it subtle for the unexperienced? Yes, but when you stack 40 tracks of state-of-the-art mics against cheapies you feel it way stronger than you should, specially in music that has lots of silence, like classical/acoustics.
Yeah well said, I appreciate such a balanced/thoughtful response! As you said this mostly from a standpoint of not being limited by lack of gear/money etc. I’m sure with more and more mics the subtle difference stack massively, especially in terms of noise and unpleasant frequencies :))
It's not though. What about harmonic saturation? Just use Acustica LAVA to match
I haven’t heard of Acustica LAVA, will check it out! I’d encourage you to have a look at Jim Lils video on where mic tone comes from - he seemed to find that unless you’re clipping next to no saturation actually takes place :)
The iPhone Comparison was insane, I thought they sounded great and super close to the real thing. Obviously, there was the compression making it different and also polar patterns, but other than that, pretty darn close, close enough to not notice too much in a mix.
Ah, this will trigger so many ignorants, but I congratulate you on your courage to do this. And you are absolutely right about it, the frequency curve is the most important difference between different microphones, also there are a few other factors, but really negligeable.
Yep exactly! Let’s of people keen to bring up other differences but none of them are associated with price. People spend more for the frequency response but there’s nothing inherently magical about it!
I wouldn't put way too much money into dynamic mics for miking up a drum kit. I haven't even heard of "Lewitts". What you can't do with standard mics like SM57, Sennheiser MD421, your bass drum mic of choice, that might as well be a Shure 91a PZM for board room meetings or a large Countryman thing - it depends on what drummer and his kit. Your favorite stereo pair of condensers, be it Neumann KM or Shure PG81 are very important, for high frequency transients and stereo image. Whether your vocal studio mic is a Neumann U87 or AKGC414 XLS - set it to omni pattern as an ambient mic, and pay attention to level-pads and characteristics. Higher dynamic range and ready EQ curve means less noise, and that's what we pay for ;)
Yeah as you said it’s a bit of a flawed experiment since it mostly tested close dynamic mics which are pretty affordable anyway 🤣 The main reason I wanted to do it was a) check out EQ match and see how effective it actually is b) hopefully make drum recording slightly less intimidating to beginners/removing the “I can’t record until I can afford X” mindset :) I think you’re spot on with everything you said and I appreciate you being polite and kind etc!!
This isa great video , I thought that this channel had way more subs than it does
Thanks man!!
No way this works across all mics. There is a clear difference when you upgrade.
I’d love to hear a comparison if someone else has the mics for it - I also suspect that with more nuanced sources (eg acoustic guitar or piano) it likely would make more of a difference but for drums, especially the close mics, I don’t think so
0:12 Hello, If companies are vague it is because the marketing people describe the characteristics of the microphones, not because they want to hide something from you. I can assure you that behind Shure, Sennheiser, Akg, DPA, Electro voice, Schoeps, etc., etc., there are many audio engineers who could talk for days about acoustic engineering, electronics and the differences between microphones. There is a lot of knowledge you can incorporate, don't choose the easy path of being like a flat earther.
Good luck with your experiments and I hope you delve deeper into this beautiful profession that is audio engineering.
Agreed - to be honest that was more of an exaggeration to hook viewers, I will say though that loads of audio people use vague language to describe gear though as a result and it though and it can be misleading when perhaps the lovely “warmth” they are describing is better described as a 1db boost at 200hz
Greater definition from the 999 mic, no 3d quality to the 215 er.. your ear develope..its how it makes you feel in the end
Bro i’m about to but one mic this month and when i saw the reviews i thougth the same ahahahah one is more crispy and other is more low end but the expensive one really have diference, like u can understand mumble in 10k microfone
Trust your ears man!!! Listen to some blind tests and see what you really think:))
@@JacobdeJongh fr
A sounded better and B sounded like it had a boost in frequencies it could not recreate/capture.
You can get mics to sound the same but it all comes down to the total amount of information coming from the mic and the cheaper mics seem to have more electricity and self noise that are boosted.
(the mic cables are like the antenna for the signal and the mic is the magnetic field oscillator but if the resistance is too low the self noise is harsher when the cable will just pick up natural fields in the air and turn that into electric static onto the overall signal).
The cymbals with the high-end frequency and sustain of the tail is sounding better in the A mic and shorter and more dense compressed electric and hard and almsot no tail in the B mic. That's my guess atleast.
They sound the same "EQ wise" but it's all in the details that is different. An expensive microphone can have more detail like an 8K camera has more detail than a HD camera but the image from a distance has the exact same colors "sounding the same" but when you zoom in you see difference in framrate and image quality. etc.
I could be all wrong who cares its all fun.
*MY SON IT IS NOT A THEORY!!!! I have been telling folks for years, GET SEVERAL PROFESSIONAL 31 BAND GRAPHIC EQS.... You can make miracles happen, dialing in nearly anything you want!*
Hahaha love it 🤣
I'm not a sound fundi and my ears are not the greatest, but surely the acoustics of a room must have an influence on how a mic sounds. Any sound engineers care to enlighten us?
I think the room arguably makes the biggest difference (other than the player and the instrument)! In the tests in theory would’ve affected the mics equally:)
By the way out interest you’re not from east Africa are you? Fundi is one I’ve only ever heard from my dad’s side of the family who lived in Tanzania haha - it’s from Swahili right?
michael reeves intro, W
Haha can you tell I studied mech eng 🤣🤣 stolen straight from the goat lmao
Damn under 400 views and 400 subs was not expecting that, anyway just wanted to say I have a nice pair of headphones, Sennheiser hd560's, and off of my phone I cannot notice a difference between the two mics even without EQ.
Ahhh I really appreciate that!! Thank you :) yeah it’s amazing right - not worth buying any more mics for now
Very good video. I'm no audio expert, though many of my videos have audio quality aspects to them, so I have some experience. I think the key take away from this is not whether you are 100% correct in everything you say, but that cheap equipment can sound good, and if you understand it's limitations then you can make it sound as good as expensive stuff, at least for the puposes of making RUclips videos, which is all I am doing. Thanks 👍 😀
Hey man I really appreciate it! Couldn’t agree more - more than anything I just want people to make sure they’re not thinking expensive equipment is what is holding them back :)
AAA mic theory
A rode NT1 sounds nothing like a U47!
I don't have a U47 to test but if you do, please try the Ozone EQ Match and share the result!
I forgot who, but one of the pros did a test where they recorded with both a Rode NT1 and one of those super expensive famous mics and tried to match the sound with EQ. They literally just boosted one frequency by 3db and cut one by 1db and they sounded basically exactly the same.
yeah but tbf the NT1 breaks when you just blow at it (meanwhile the U47 only breaks when you look at it. buy an AKG C214 and be settled for life.)
@@JacobdeJongh please do yourself a favour and actually try a 47 before spreading so much misinformation. If you cant hear the difference then maybe you need to get some good monitors or train your ears.
@@MariJu1ce I'd love to try a U47! I'm not worried about misinformation - I've simply shown results from a test and said I can't really hear a difference. If you can that's great and I envy your ears :)
Out of interest, on the A/B blind test do you have a guess as to which mics were which?
Well, 2 years ago, Pink Floyd released a new song which featured this Ukrainian singer, called.... Yhuulleeiiisshwuui Trrryylluuiiivvviiiiiiiiiiicc.... kidding of course, but everyone's always talking about how good PF's recordings/mixing sounds and at the same time, nobody seemed to remember the Ukranian singer's recorded on an iPhone!!!! :O In the original video there's him singing, wind noises, birds; etc and PF's brilliant engineers managed to filter all of those out and ended up with a decent sonding vocal "production", so..... do you NÉÉD a Neumann U-47 or a Sony C-800G?? NO!! They make the life of an engineer much easier and it also makes the vocalist come alive more, because they're hearing the subtle nuances of their voice better in their headphones whilst singing, so the performance will be better but soundwise... Oh, I remember now... the song's called: Hey, hey, rise up! ;) Greetings from a neighbour from overseas (Netherlands)
i dont fully understand what the point of this video is. the raw samples there is a clear difference between mics. of course you can EQ in post to make it sound different, but that doesnt mean the mics dont make a difference. im a guitarist and often use a combination of different mics to get the sound i want as to not need to do as much EQing in post. because a sm57 dont sound like a r121.
Heya, yep I get completely using multiple mics on one source as a workflow thing - I think it’s great.
This was just more to say that microphones probably aren’t the magical missing ingredient in your recording, it’s probably your ears (or the players/instrument/room your recording in) - mostly to stop myself buying random mics on eBay tbh 🤣
goodness & thanks!! PREXENTS #prexents used 90's built-in mic cassette & digital voice recorders, built-in laptop mics, a flexible minikorg mic, camera mics, random cellphones & iphone voice recorders, Tascam DR40, MXL Combo, & SM57
“Work with what you got, don’t wait” should be the motto of the audio world I think :))
yes i can
you said it in a different intonation so obviously there is a difference, if you wanted to be honest you sould have the same clip played twice
btw: i think it makes sense for large studios to have a wide mic variety, but regular users can just get the cheap beringher mics and it's gonna be perfectly adequate
All the point was of the opening clip is a) make sure you trust your ears over your eyes b) the source is always going to be more important than the microphone!! And yeah as you say, I totally get spending lots on mics if you’re a large studio owner but for home studios it should be pretty low priority :)
I wish everybody good luck when you grab all your cheap mikes and try do do a live show with it 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yeah reliability is a whole different challenge 🤣 lmao
Yes, my advice, after 38 years of Livesound experience: Get the cheapest from the classic Range. So buy some SM57, SM58, some KM184 and than become the best in your Job. That‘s a way where you mikes will outlive you and you have a good career.
Make it cheap and slap a very well known brand name on it then sell it over priced
Out of mix I thought B sounded better.
In the mix, I really couldn't tell a difference
There’s some truth to it. however, it’s not so clear cut. I used to think that you could just EQ match everything until I did a lot of testing and realized you couldn’t. Good example is the high frequency response of an SM 7B against high frequency response of a MKH 416. There’s just a different character to the sound because at higher frequencies the membrane is vibrating differently in a break up region and there are different acoustic properties due to the different designs, the same reason why soft tweeters sound different from aluminum tweeters no matter how much you try to equalize them.
Never mind all the other factors like polar pattern, phase response, time domain behavior, handling noise, durability, production, consistency, sensitivity, noise floor, appearance.
You're right, sort of... Yes, the differences between cheap gear and premium gear are subtle. The gear you use is not nearly as important as how you use it, but like you said it yourself, the Lewitts aren't premium mics either. I think plugin companies are guilty of that as well, placing so much emphasis in how their plugins are going to completely change your music and make you sound like a pro instantly. Ultimately the only thing that matters is the source: Good song, good drummer, good drums, good room and an engineer who knows how to capture it. If anything expensive gear can be overwhelming for amateurs because they don't know how to properly use it.
Well said - couldn’t agree more!!!
I’ll take Bob Marley on a “cheap” microphone, over Ed Sheeran on a $15,000 microphone… ANY DAY !!!!
Well said!! (Though I don’t mind ed sheeran haha I agree with the sentiment 100%)
@@JacobdeJongh it’s the music.. not the mic… Bob’s still, provin’ it… every single day… right here, on the World Wide Web… 2024 !!!! WE’LL BE FOREVER, LOVIN’ YAHWEH !!!!!!! 😂😆😊😎😊 ❤️🎶 (and we can do it, WITHOUT A MIC !!!! WE DON’T NEED.. NO🎤MICROPHONE)
Good video and I have made good recordings on Android devices.
Good for you man! Don’t let budget hold you back :)
@@JacobdeJongh Its more to do with convenience, I have decent Microphones its just faster to record stuff with a phone.
While I enjoyed the premise, but I'm sorry to say this, but i hear a few issues with this test. For one, the raw drums already don't sound great to start with so that's likely not gonna bring out the differences as much, which imo is more in the room tone, drum tone nuance, and as you mentioned, bleed. All of these things make a HUGE difference after processing. Also lewitt mics are great at hitting above their price point in general, BUT they are hardly a quality setup. 1k for 7 mics is really not gonna net a great setup. I know they're overall a great value. I recently recommended someone just get any set of mics and use the Lewitt overheads, since that matters a lot more than close mics imo for a solid drum recording.
Regardless, the close tom mics I started with SM57s and then went to e604s and finally 421s. i noticed serious jumps in quality with each of those jumps. that being said i feel that both of these kits are lower quality products in general. often where i noticed the difference in mic kits were with in the kick and overheads when i was shopping around (for friends and myself). lewitt gave great on both of these ends, but even so it's not the be all end all. the 'in a mix' involves post processing and how the mics handle that. The big differences i noticed on the toms were that the low end became more focused as i went up levels. the 57s were more boxy and hard to place, while the 421s are easy to setup and get to sound great easily without any need for post processing or tone shaping. the e604s were somewhere in the middle, but the main reason for them was a fast setup when i got 57s in the right spot and some basic EQ they weren't too different, the raw tracks with the e604s were more focused and less boxy. the jump to 421s were very much worth it though.
now i'm not saying you can get decent results on a budget. i've seen people do amazing stuff with nady or cad mics (known as some of the worst mics on the market for drums). put enough EQ in and it'll sound passable. and that's where i think both of these mic kits are. with enough time in the mix it'll sound similar since they're not a huge difference in quality, but they definitely are a difference in quality. it's just subtle in your tests. both are passable though, which speaks volumes to the subzero stuff. but once again tech has come a long way in the cheap market.
As far as the multitracks, having them as MP3s isn't exactly helpful to analyze things.
I am curious if you put this stuff up against more traditional mics how big the difference would be. The reason to get good mics is because it mixes itself more or less. no need to EQ match, no need to deal with wimpy transients, no need to deal with weird off axis response (see hihat in snare), how much mic placement effects the tone, or just super harsh and brittle on the high end (sorry this can't easily be fixed with EQ). Your methodology focuses on one key difference, one that i've mostly stopped looking for in mics. but yeah comparing a low end to a low mid tier isn't gonna make much of a difference. what you are paying for is better quality overheads in the lewitt (though to be fair the OH mics they paired with it alone aren't that expensive). So what I'd recommend is getting a cheap set that sounds good like the sub zero and buying some good overheads and leaning on them until you can afford quality mics. or get a good kick mic, grab an SM57, good overheads, and use the subzero mics for toms. I appreciate the effort in this video and the blind tests. Keep at it! You are way better in testing than some other youtubers who deem themselves "professionals." I think you are on the right track, but gotta have the quality too. The first few vids I did on another channel suucked (i mostly do live streaming on twitch now and will resume as soon as renovations in my new place are complete), so glad you are giving it a shot! I don't want to discourage you, just some pointers to improve.
I appreciate the encouragement and the constructive criticism! Everything you said is spot on :)
@@JacobdeJongh thank you
… should’ve been the cheap mics compared to studio workhorses.
I don’t have studio workhorses 🤣😭
Interesting idea but no. Comparing an nt1a to a u47 is just ridiculous. I own both and it’s night and day.
Oooh have you tried using EQ match with them? Would love to hear the results!!
I can very clearly hear a difference at the beginning, but that's probably because you're blocking your mouth with the first microphone. Great video BTW. Didn't realize until I went to subscribe that this is a new, small channel.
It’s also massively become of just the tone I’m speaking with - first one was quieter and softer and I just turned it up to match :)
👏
hello! hahah
As usual with anything, if something is 10x more pricey it doesn't mean it's 10x better. Rarely even 2x better... Focus on recording techniques, microphone placement, room sound & treatment, phase, tuning of instruments and getting a good sound in a room... All those are 10x more important than gear.
Yep spot on - there's no excuse anymore not to be making music! What a wonderful time to be alive :)
You're absolutely right.
But to be fair, what you pay in a microphone, especially more expensive ones (to a point) isn't "better" sound. You pay for the fact that every and each unit from the production line sounds exactly, or at very least very close to, like every other mic from that same production line.
Because then when you grab a certain mic, you know that it'll sound the same, no matter if it's from your stash, or a studio that's located at the other side of the world.
Same thing when buying studio monitors, you want to steer away from any that's sold in pairs. Because that means they have bad tolerances when they're produced and must be matched before they're sold to you. If they're sold per piece, you know you can take any one, from any production run and match it with any other and they'll sound the same. Or at least close enough that there's no need to pick and match.
Basically every single SM57/SM58 I've ever used sounds exact same, every Röde mic of particular model sounds the same between each other etc.
And they're not that expensive. Take bunch of very cheap mics from Thomann and differences between the same model in different production runs can be pretty large.
And when you're a professional, consistency is key to working more efficiently.
I agree 100%. You pay for quality control and reliability that you're just not going to get with dirt cheap mics. I reckon the £250-£750 is probably the sweet spot for most mics, and it is good to know that I'm not missing out on anything by not owning an expensive vintage mic 😅
Great video all the same
Thanks man!
I think if youre neglecting/dismissing all these wonderful mics youre missing out on alot of beauty and character and a whole dimention lost in the production . You gotta use one for yourself when you try mics, a difference in mics arent just how they sound in an ab test on youtube. But how they react to different positioning different sources, how well they take eq, how fast they are, sibilance, forwardness, depth, detail. If you record shitty stuff then there may not be easy to tell the difference, but record good sources where there are actually detail to pick up there is a huge difference. Its all subtle but when you first learn to hear it you cant unhear it. the user experience on good mics are so much easier to get a good sound than bad mics for the job.
Expensiver isnt better, the right mic for the source is the best, no matter the price. But in vocals there is definetly easier to get a good sound with a 251 or a 47 than an 57 or a Røde. Ive used a ton of vintage and expensive mics, and the better you record something the easier it will fit in the mix and need less tweaking after. Your take on the u47 sounding the same as a røde with some eq is just completely Bs. Sorry. There is a reason why so much new music sound like shit, because people neglect recording quality nowadays and cant tell the difference with good mics. Microphones are not eq curves, they capture emotion, and if there is no emotion to capture you might as well use a shit mic cause you wont tell the difference. But when there is depth and detail in the source only good mics can capture that. Check out how much difference in front to back depth there is in a u67 vs a u87 forexample. Or the transient response. How they handle sibilance, how much faster the lowend in the u87 is etc. unless you have worked with those mics you dont know how they respond in actuality.😢 i just think youre missing out. Listen to on some atc speakers or something like that with little distortion, and youll hear everything
You cannot record a soprano on a Blue Yeti (non-Pro), 2013 edition. It's clipping on 10k+ frequencies. You bring down the gain as much as you want, it still clips because the capsule is not built for that. Growling rockers, yes, you can, but no sopranos.
Yeah that’s a perfect example, there are absolutely limitations - no point trying to make a mic sound like something it’s not entirely :)
@@JacobdeJongh Thank you for agreeing with me. It's the same reason why you cannot record an explosion with any mic. It does not matter how low is the gain when you record the explosion, the diaphragm WILL bounce too hard if there is a loud sound, so it will clip. And professional singers make a lot of loud sounds and it is pleasing to hear them, but you need the proper mic for it.
💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯 Use what you can afford.
This is a pretty funny vid . Mostly nonsense but I get the premise.
A lot of folks like to complain about cheaper mics or clone mics and just bang on about spending tens of thousands of pounds on vintage mics .
Very cheap mics do have a lot of issues which definitely cannot be dealt with by using EQ. Yes you can get similar sounding tones by eq matching . But the real differences tend to become a lot more apparent when you start using dynamics to raise the noise floor and swish the signal . As previous folks have said . Phase correlation starts to really become a problem when using eq. But also proximity artefacts react very differently with capsules made with inferior quality materials !
That being said . You really don’t need to spend the top money to get a great sound . A lot of mid priced microphones sound great and are more than useable!
Also you’ll find most Pros do not use anything on the way in . No EQ and very little compression . I’ve have literally done thousands of sessions with some of the world’s biggest engineers and producers and I can count on one hand the amount of folks that use anything on the way in .
If it doesn’t sound right move the microphone or change the microphone and flip the phase before you go to the eq.
When you get a bit more experience with different types of mics and rooms and you get to use some the more top end microphones you’ll definitely hear the difference ! Even more so when in a room with actual acoustics and reflections !
Oh and you right about one thing
Microphones companies talk a lot of bollocks to sell there products just everyone else in the retail industry .
We are literally in the middle of the Audio Clone wars !
If you want to learn from someone who genuinely knows about using microphones properly go and watch a few videos of the late great Steve Albini
You’ll learn a lot and also realise he’s not a gear snob at all
Spot on - I'm not suggesting at all that people use only cheap sm57 clones for the rest of their lives, just that it's worth relying on your ears when choosing your next mic rather than marketing or even blindly copying what pros use.
That's so surprising to me that you've found pros don't tend to use anything on the way in - I haven't worked in a professional studio, so much of that assumptions just come from watching guys on RUclips... appreciate the insight!
To clerify, it's not a difference in EQ and this is vastly undermining the different types of microphones out there and as someone who is self centered in my voice... How dare you say my AKG p220 sounds like any other microphone.
......But then 7 iPhones are definitely more expensive than 7 drum mics used in the video
And more processing is needed!
I'm also curious about which iPhone model you're using.
Yeah haha not an economic decision for sure - not sure which models they were, all within the last probably 5 years?
You will have a subscriber if this video pans out as well as the first 30 seconds my friend!
Ahhhahah dude thanks!! Appreciate it :))
if you can not heard difference between cheap and expensive mics, then audio recording is not for you.
Which was which in the blind test?
@@JacobdeJongh you are comparing basically two similar league mics. why not take lewit vs neumann u47, u87, akg c12 or elam 251? why not also reviewing how they react to effects - eq, compresors, etc. at the first impression they might sound similar but when it comes to mixing it is totally another story.
Cool vid but was it me or the lip sync was off
It is in one or two of the clips - the video moved at some point in the last hour of editing so I did my best to resync but clearly I did not succeed at some points :(
The answer is, they sound different you just made them sound the same. Make the same without the reference EQ, then you are just mixing normally.
Yeah spot on. It’s just a comment on where we should be spending our time, maybe more working on our ears for better mixes and less researching or buying microphones :)
I can’t hear much difference between the expensive and matched versions, but this video barely proves the point it was meant to.
If you don’t have a recording of that drum in that particular position of the expensive microphone you’re trying to match with ozone eq, you’re pretty much done here, as you can’t go on with that eq profile for other applications.
Other than that, how well it captures transients, how musically it compresses, what’s the noise floor and dynamic range. The saturation, which behaves in an unpredictable way and responds to different dynamics of the source differently. To say the least, the build quality and reliability.
Also, beware the of dozens of counterfeit when getting a new mic from unauthorized dealers, if you decide to continue with your research.
Cheers.
I wish a budget mic sounded rich like u87, but it doesn’t😢
Neither the all-in-one mics with EQ model presets do capture sound like the genuine mic did. They are more like at “if I used that mics, it’d sound somewhat like that” level.
Oh yeah, I also didn’t like how lewitt sounded. But it doesn’t mean anything or it could mean a number of things tbh
I appreciate you responding with a thoughtful but also respectful comment! For me this wasn’t about “can you use EQ match on every mic to sound like expensive mics” or even whether or not the mic sounded identical - even though that’s how it’s portrayed. It was more just to test a) do you need expensive mics to make good music? And the answer is a resounding no and b) how much of the “tone” of a mic can be attributed to only frequency response? And I felt it was a pretty clear “most of it”. There very much are many other differences between the microphones I compared but for me those 2 big questions were answered :)
Yeah I felt the same to be honest - I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt because the kit had super old heads on (just a kit from a rehearsal room) so they didn’t really get a fair chance but I wasn’t particularly impressed 😅
awesome job!