Hi there, thank you for this comparison, very useful! Listening on laptop with my travel Bose in-ears (sadly my Audeze's are too heavy for travel) here's what I heard: - acoustic gtr: M160 rounded; SM57 cuts through; 121 unnecessary bass extension, meh; so M160 it is as a alternative to my KM184s or AKG414. - overheads: SM57 crisp but not fulsome enough; M160 absolutely, I hear why producers love it; R121 too dark , maybe adjustable with EQ, but M160 is just right - electric guitar: woah the SM57 (which I have always used) sounds grainy/gritty in comparison; M160 nice and truthful; 121 ok I see why engineers love this, its seems to add additional harmonics/richness that sounds great for the right track! Given I want to complement my mic locker and I can get a pair of M160s for same price as one 121, BUT more importantly M160 can cater for more situations/flexibility, its definitely my next purchase! Thanks again :)
Yes, I heard it like that too. Although, I'd also so I don't love the sound of Ribbons or dynamic mics for acoustic guitar. I prefer condensors. Definitely M160 on drum overheads (though AEA & Coles are probably even better, though many times the price). I was surprised that the M160, while maybe not being quite as nice on electric guitar cab as R-121, it was still very good, and sounded quite similar, just a bit less smooth, a bit less bass, and the M160 had a touch more fizz. But the R-121 smoothness is hard to deny. The M160 might sound better than the Royer R-10, and AEA Nuvo though. Definitely M160 more flexible, I preferred it on vocal too. So a pair of M160 first it is, then save up for R-121 to pair with SM57 for guitar cab close micing (though SM57 front and back on open back can get some of the way there to a nice full sound). Then maybe R84 AEA for mono room mic. GAP R1A are actually pretty good on the cheap too.
Great review as always ! The M160 sounded the most balanced of the three, no wonder it is so legendary. Only in the last example , the room drums, I did not clearly prefer the M160, but I could use any of the three depending on the sound I wanted to achieve.
Agreed. On something like room drums, it becomes more of a color consideration, rather than detail. (for me) Plus I kept these mics unprocessed, but typically, I'll also crush the room sound with heavy compression to bring out even more of the room ambience.
Nice compare. I have a pair of M160s and really love them. Very versatile and dare I say the most versatile of all the ribbons I've used/tried. Excellent overheads, used them to record cello/violin and I love using them on guitar cabs paired with a SM57. They complement each other very well. I've never owned a 121, maybe someday, but I'd say to my ears regarding your compare the M160 is a bit less dark than the 121. The 121 is also a bit fuller in the lowend -- that can be good or bad depending on the source.
Thanks for the comment. Yeah, the 121 is darker, but also very different in terms of transient response. I love the M 160 on its own, but typically mix my 121 with other mics, unless I’m trying to tone down the brightness of a violin or trumpet.
As a guitarist, I'd probably reach for the 57+121 combo if I wanted the widest bandwidth possible, the 57+160 combo if the source has a lot of low end, and just the 160 if I wanted a balanced sound from just a single mic.
I can see why the SM57 and Royer 121 are such a popular combo for guitar. My ears are not all that great but I kept liking the SM57 until you'd switch to the Royer and then I felt like the Royer was a more well rounded sound or pleasing for my ears. Knowing your speaking voice but not your singing voice, it was a toss for me between the SM57 and again the Royer. The Royer seemed to be fuller to my ears and the SM57 had a more open midrange and up but lacked the fullness.
Agreed! The interesting thing is that all 3 have completely different sonic qualities. To me, it is almost like the M 160 gives the combination of the SM57 and R 121 in one mic. As for vocals, I wouldn’t say any are really vocal mics, and I’m not primarily a singer. But what is interesting is how different they represent the same vocal subject in terms of the tone, clarity, and body of a vocal.
Excellent mic comparison video! Kudos!
Thank you!
Hi there, thank you for this comparison, very useful! Listening on laptop with my travel Bose in-ears (sadly my Audeze's are too heavy for travel) here's what I heard:
- acoustic gtr: M160 rounded; SM57 cuts through; 121 unnecessary bass extension, meh; so M160 it is as a alternative to my KM184s or AKG414.
- overheads: SM57 crisp but not fulsome enough; M160 absolutely, I hear why producers love it; R121 too dark , maybe adjustable with EQ, but M160 is just right
- electric guitar: woah the SM57 (which I have always used) sounds grainy/gritty in comparison; M160 nice and truthful; 121 ok I see why engineers love this, its seems to add additional harmonics/richness that sounds great for the right track!
Given I want to complement my mic locker and I can get a pair of M160s for same price as one 121, BUT more importantly M160 can cater for more situations/flexibility, its definitely my next purchase! Thanks again :)
Spot on. Thanks for your followup reflections. 😀
Yes, I heard it like that too. Although, I'd also so I don't love the sound of Ribbons or dynamic mics for acoustic guitar. I prefer condensors. Definitely M160 on drum overheads (though AEA & Coles are probably even better, though many times the price). I was surprised that the M160, while maybe not being quite as nice on electric guitar cab as R-121, it was still very good, and sounded quite similar, just a bit less smooth, a bit less bass, and the M160 had a touch more fizz. But the R-121 smoothness is hard to deny. The M160 might sound better than the Royer R-10, and AEA Nuvo though. Definitely M160 more flexible, I preferred it on vocal too. So a pair of M160 first it is, then save up for R-121 to pair with SM57 for guitar cab close micing (though SM57 front and back on open back can get some of the way there to a nice full sound). Then maybe R84 AEA for mono room mic. GAP R1A are actually pretty good on the cheap too.
Great review as always !
The M160 sounded the most balanced of the three, no wonder it is so legendary. Only in the last example , the room drums, I did not clearly prefer the M160, but I could use any of the three depending on the sound I wanted to achieve.
Agreed. On something like room drums, it becomes more of a color consideration, rather than detail. (for me) Plus I kept these mics unprocessed, but typically, I'll also crush the room sound with heavy compression to bring out even more of the room ambience.
Nice compare. I have a pair of M160s and really love them. Very versatile and dare I say the most versatile of all the ribbons I've used/tried. Excellent overheads, used them to record cello/violin and I love using them on guitar cabs paired with a SM57. They complement each other very well. I've never owned a 121, maybe someday, but I'd say to my ears regarding your compare the M160 is a bit less dark than the 121. The 121 is also a bit fuller in the lowend -- that can be good or bad depending on the source.
Thanks for the comment. Yeah, the 121 is darker, but also very different in terms of transient response. I love the M 160 on its own, but typically mix my 121 with other mics, unless I’m trying to tone down the brightness of a violin or trumpet.
As a guitarist, I'd probably reach for the 57+121 combo if I wanted the widest bandwidth possible, the 57+160 combo if the source has a lot of low end, and just the 160 if I wanted a balanced sound from just a single mic.
It’s a classic combo for a reason! 😃
I can see why the SM57 and Royer 121 are such a popular combo for guitar. My ears are not all that great but I kept liking the SM57 until you'd switch to the Royer and then I felt like the Royer was a more well rounded sound or pleasing for my ears. Knowing your speaking voice but not your singing voice, it was a toss for me between the SM57 and again the Royer. The Royer seemed to be fuller to my ears and the SM57 had a more open midrange and up but lacked the fullness.
Agreed! The interesting thing is that all 3 have completely different sonic qualities. To me, it is almost like the M 160 gives the combination of the SM57 and R 121 in one mic. As for vocals, I wouldn’t say any are really vocal mics, and I’m not primarily a singer. But what is interesting is how different they represent the same vocal subject in terms of the tone, clarity, and body of a vocal.