$50 mic vs $1000 mic: a FAIR comparison!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 авг 2024
- By popular demand, here is a totally fair comparison between a $50 AKG mic and a $1000 Neumann mic.
In this video you'll here:
A Neumann Mic: geni.us/4jS0B (Amazon)
An AKG similar to this one: geni.us/oVSj (Amazon)
For Home studio equipment options check out kit.co/mikedelg...
There you'll find options for home studio setups at a variety of different budgets.
For my videos:
My main camera:geni.us/bj-a6400
My small camera: geni.us/RWNNVxO (Amazon)
Help me make more videos: Donate USD or Bitcoin at www.coinbase.c...
Links to amazon and kit.com may include affiliate codes in which I earn a small commission on products you purchase. . Thanks!
“I can’t sing.”
Alcohol: trust me. You can do anything.
The best mic is the one you have. If you get another, then best mics are the ones you have.
hardhitter0421 my photography teacher would always say," the best camera is the one you have"
So if I get 12 different mics, are they all the best ones i could have?! :D
@@dreadcyde804 yea and U can sell/give away one or exchange it for a better model if You are not satisfied with it.... i mean technically....
I would say that philosophy makes more sense for photography than a vocal studio. If for any other reason you're a lot less likely to make the sound equivalent of a 'snapshot'.
'Good enough' picture is also a lot easier to capture than good audio.
I could tell the difference if I'm paying attention, when I wasn't paying attention you could switch and I wouldn't notice. I still want to hear a mic shootout between the Neumann and the Sennheiser!
+ThickFreedom I can do that one next!
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Hows that 10 second response time?
Hey Mike, I replied to that email! contact me when you have some free time! :)
yeah i can tell too. one has a slight hiss, and slightly more sibilance. pretty sure it's the akg mic. but is it anything a bit of eq and noise gating cant fix? not really
Great video Mike and good points too. Just for the other peeps out there, the Neumann is expensive because it is intended to be used in a music [studio] enviroment, where it's ability to capture a wider frequency range (especially the low-end) while having a low noise floor, will be utilized. For beginning voice actors, unless you're recording bass drums, orchestral ensembles etc. it's really pointless to buy a mic like the TLM. Practice, skill and post-processing techniques is what you have to really invest in for the most part.
100% man, also pre-production makes a huge difference. Chucking mics on stuff and just calling it a day is almost always going to bite you in the ass.
Giuliano Pierrot o
environment*
Giuliano Pierrot k
Great video...except for the fact that there was no indication of when one mic or the other was in use. (And in order to avoid any confirmation bias, you could close your eyes on the first listen, then go back and compare results with when you KNOW which mic was on.)
I can argue it both ways. I honestly can’t hear any difference at all between the two mics. I have no idea where you are changing.
Having said that, I recently had a conversation about the law of diminishing returns in mics with the head audio guy at a major studio. He used mics in the 30k range. The way he looked at it was like this. (I’m putting this in quotes, but it’s not word for word accurate):
“Diminishing returns...yes that’s how I used to see it as well. Then I fell in love with my _________(some incredibly expensive handmade mic from some European country), and I started using it on all my recordings. These recordings caught the ear of _________ (the people that hired him for his incredibly cool job). They hired me because of what they heard on the projects I had done. The difference in what they heard on my projects wasn’t me, it was that mic. For me at least, it made all the difference. It took me from having this as a hobby, to making it my source of livelihood and the coolest job in the world!”
He went on to say that once you have a mic like that, you learn to hear the difference, and once you do, there is simply no comparison: the 30k mics just blow away the lessor mics.
Another thing is that he did a lot of longer distance miking. The acoustics in his studio were simply wonderful. If he was miking a singing guitarist, he would use just one mike for both the guitar and voice. He would spend twenty minutes or so getting the placement just right so that the balance between the two (plus the room ambience) was perfect acoustically. The sound he would get this way was breathtaking, even to my “years of doing live sound damaged ears”.
His earlier recordings (that got him that great job) were done in his basement studio. He had spent an amazing amount of time and effort on the acoustics of that space as well. I would say that this was as important as the 30k mic in jumpstarting his career.
The way I look at it now is this:
On close miking (like you do with a voiceover, or often with a singer), the law of diminishing returns is quite true, and it is difficult to tell the difference as you go up the chasing of more expensive mics.
On distance miking (where you hear the room ambience), the situation immediately changes, and the difference between top and bottom to mid level microphones becomes quite audible.
Note that in distance miking, the microphone is only part of the equation. The other part is having a room with spectacular acoustics. If you were to use a 30k microphone in a bedroom (distance miked), it would just sound like a very average bedroom. If you were to use the same mic in a deadened home sound booth, both mics are going to sound like a deadened booth and there won’t be a heck of a difference there either. It isn’t until you have a place to record with beautiful acoustics that a top tier mic makes any sense.
Personally, I stick to about $300 to $400 mics, and use them mostly for close miking. The acoustics in my condo simply aren’t worth the better mics. Nobody would hear the difference.
But then again, I’m just a retired live sound person. My recording now is just a hobby. I have no access to any place with spectacular acoustics.
If I was a young person with good ears and ambition to be a top person in the incredibly competitive world of professional sound, a top tier mic might be a really important investment. But, before I spent the mics, I would worry about setting up a space with spectacular acoustics. Until you have such a space, the high tier mic will make very little difference.
Just my “retired sound guy” two cents.
there are these comparisons that either he used some final processing or not sure because In other comparisons there is clear difference. also he didn’t compare noise and other things making this comparison useless. he has views but it’s not deserved to the information and purpose of this useless video. I have akg 100, not recording anything but when I was testing it, it sounds pretty average like every other $50-100 mic. it got famous only because it’s frequency response graph similarity to neumann u87 which btw is also useless since there are other factors that make this mic sound muddy and tinny.
Some sort of handmade mic was what he told me. Maybe he was exaggerating.
As someone who just recently built a vocal booth i think i'll be perfectly happy with the Røde NT1 XD i don't plan on spending any more right now (tho i did spent 244€ on a pair of planar magnetic headphones. Some nice cans i gotta say)
A couple years late, but: I'm listening to this though my AKG K701 studio headphones as well as my Yamaha HS80M monitors both run through a decent mixer, and the difference in quality really is negligible. Great couple of videos, this and the "unfair" one, to show how much more important sound proofing and acoustic treatment is to get a good recording out of your gear, whatever it is.
Lol at all the audio pros saying they can hear a massive difference...
I remember when I used to think about this crap all the time. One day you realize it's mostly a scam, and 99% of people will listen to whatever you record on horrible speakers in untreated rooms/cars anyways.
No, you don't need a 1000 mic for VO, and no you can't hear the difference to a degree that matters, I dont care what overpriced recording school you attended.
I think a lot of people worry that they spent too much on a microphone (or anything else really), and to make themselves feel better they defend their purchases by saying expensive things are always the best option. That way they don't feel like they made a bad decision. I used to do that kind of stuff all the time.
Also I think there's a slight difference between these two mics but like someone else said, its not a $950 difference.
8
Good point, but what it matters is could you sell your VO work with low quality microphone ?
Yeah, just get an SM58 or similar mic and 99.999% of the population will be satisfied with your sound. Only a rare few mic snobs will care, and only if they can actually see the mic you're using.
ty son.
Every time I watch one of these mic comparison videos I just realize my headphones are terrible lol
I heard absolutely zero difference xD
The only reason the $1000 mic is so expensive is because its a studio mic, which means it can pick up the warmth in his voice much better than the $50 mic. RUclips filters out the audio when you upload a video, so you cannot tell, but if it was the original audio directly from the mic, you might be able to tell better. The reason RUclips filters this out, is because the average video will not notice the difference, much less care, while watching a video.
Warmth in the voice. Uter bullshit. Both of those microphones have veeeeeeeeeery similar circuits(originally design by Shoeps for their microphones) and capsules.
There will because they are different microphones not because one is more expensive and one is cheap.
Also remember that you're hearing through computer speakers or headphones.
To be able to hear the diferences you're going to need higher quality speakers.
If I heard it right, the $1000 mic has a better low end than the eBay special. Either was acceptable IMO.
The $1000 mic is better for him because he does voice over work and audio engineers need the audio to be as accurate as possible when editing the waves
Thank you for this comparison. There really wasn’t a noticeable difference to me, and what I really or from this is your point about diminishing returns. I have an AT4050 I got used for $400. I have been drooling over the idea of getting a new Neumann TLM 103, but your point, especially via the comparison, shows me how fiscally foolish that is.
Stick to a well-known manufacturer of Professional Microphones - like, say, Electro-Voice. It's simply amazing how often E-V Mics are used in these comparison tests - as if the Neumann's have to prove something. But not everyone can afford a Neumann so why not go for an E-V instead? There's a guy calls himself 'The E-V Guy' (well, he has good reason - he's an employee I believe) He demonstrates E-V mics on You-Tube - and he can play a mean guitar too. Most of my Mics are E-V - down to my very first microphone - an E-V 665 and it's still going strong at nearly 60 years old - and I bought it new - and I recently bought another - to pair it up - for Stereo wasn't around when I bought the first E-V 665!!
I love reviews that are straight to the point, and very well presented. This was fantastic, thank you so much.
Great video, couldn't tell the difference at all. Thanks to your last video of the comparison. It really does show your location of recording drastically helps. My Eyes are well and truly opened.
The only reason the $1000 mic is so expensive is because its a studio mic, which means it can pick up the warmth in his voice much better than the $50 mic. RUclips filters out the audio when you upload a video, so you cannot tell, but if it was the original audio directly from the mic, you might be able to tell better. The reason RUclips filters this out, is because the average video will not notice the difference, much less care, while watching a video.
Given that youtube is the place were people listen to most things (except some music and so) i think it isn't that useless
AntAskew there was a exaggerated brightness with the akg by just a little bit
The Neumann was a bit more warm
Mr Frapz you tube doesn’t filter shit
It’s compression that is added when they compress it into a mp4 or other audio file
The sound is degraded a bit because of it
Mr Frapz the other mic was a studio mic also. That makes no diff
From what I can tell, the biggest difference is the underlying hiss.
Hey, aren't you that twitter guy?
yep! a cheap mic will have a higher noise floor, low headroom and unpleasant distortion
The Narrator love ur vids papa
And a noise floor removal tool will fix that right up.
And the frequency response, and the frequency response curve. The Neuman being more flat while the cheap mikes are usually either bass heavy or lacking in the high end or both or lacking bass and high end losing detail. For just talking it's not worth it but for bass drums, violin, organ or other instruments the Neumann will sound much better. Not $950 better, but better for sure.
To be honest with your guys. It doesn't matter what MIC you use if the performer's voice is TALENTED. I've thrown performers into my booth using $5 mic vs $1000 and there's really no difference. They still sound so good. Ok Ok the mic helps but I'm telling you Talent> MIC>cheap Mic.
Yang Vue $5 is a bit of an exaggeration but above 100 there’s basically no difference after mixing
😕😕😕😕
@@endi3386 "mixing"? It's only one track! You probably mean effects/processing.
So, I am watching this on my $7 headphones.....
Shaunak De watching on $7 headphones? 🤔🤔🤔 interesting
the paradox
They're sposed to go on yer ears.
LOL
Yeah, 10€ Telefunken here ..... pretty good this headphones (inear).
Why does he look like the guy from hangover??😂😂
Because thousands of years ago a meteor hit the earth and left a human population that is estimated to have been about 3000 people. Our DNA is so similar that there are doppelgängers of each of us all over. Thank you for listening!
i want you @john
I also said that
thought he was Mark Hamill tbh
@AbsolutePc Thanks for bringing race into a discussion about mics.
Thank you! Great point! Focusing on the production aspects rather than the gear.
"Law of diminishing returns" - one and only answer to all mic comparisons
BTW all talk about the TLM 103 - listen to the TLM 193 there is no better "Neumann Sound" you can get for THAT price (1200 $)
Correct. I adore the 193.
The marketing behind the 103 is that it's modeled on the U87 capsule etc.
It's a good mic but the 193 was designed to be a 193 - and it's brilliant for voiceover
The noise level is better (quiet) in Neumann TLM 103. And TLM103 sounds a bit warmer with good bass relief on the voice.
Great job, loved your point. Tried it on 3 different devices and could not tell.
I know this video is 3 years old, but THANK YOU for it! I've been wondering why my current mic (The blue snowball) sounds so much better than a lot of the "comparison" videos that use it, and now I realize it's my setup, rather than anything to do directly with the mic.
For what I need, you've convinced me there's no reason to upgrade at this time. Thank you!
Just want to say I love your down to earth viewpoint. Keep up the good work!
Thank you for the video.
A quality pop-filter has no seriously measurable effect on a microphone. In fact, when recording voice (singing or speaking), I always use one, because over a period of time, room humidity, dust, vocal moisture;-) from from the mouth, and damage to the protective metal screen from accidentally coming in contact with hard objects or dropping the mic (doh! it happens) far out-weights any advantage in not using one. My first mentor Bob Richardson was a stickler for the pop screen on vocals and dialogI
I just added an SM86 to my small collection, and I keep a $7. pop-filter on it all the time for the above reasons. Call it 'preventive' maintenance. Returning a condenser mic to the factory to clean coffee, tea and spit off the diaphragm is poor quality control. Don't believe it? Place a very bright source of light shining between the mic and the singer and shoot video at a slight angle of course and you will be amazing at the amount of moisture being expelled - more from some than others :-) Atlanta, GA
This guys voice is so compelling. He could narrate Morgan Freeman's life story
Very true. Let's talk about preamps now.
This was a smart way to do a true sequel to that previous video. Clever. Now we just have to compare the ears of the listeners so we can see who has the best ears...
DiscoChao or the better headphones to be more accurate
You want an acoustically dead booth for singing. You add reverb and echo while mixing. A non-acoustically dead booth can result in very hard to mix tracks and tracks that are nearly unusable because if the background noise.
This video has an excellent point about diminishing returns, and it's good advice. That said, it sounds heavily compressed. It'd be nice to hear what the mics sounded like before any processing was applied.
so so true..
for me the point of diminishing returns was when i spent all my money on different microphones only to a/b whole lot and realized that there really wasn't a huge difference between all of them. There was never an 'a-ha' moment. The better your gear, the more of a difference you will hear...but it won't make or break your recording.
99% of the time Talent trumps equipment (unless your equipment is horrible).
I've got it. One of the microphones has a very high frequency rattle that it adds to your vocal flaps. It's almost like a "serrated crispness" to it. The other microphone has the same thing, but it's far more controlled. I'm going to guess the more controlled one is the Neumann. It has more warmth and more clarity without sounding harsh like the AKG
the biggest difference is the hole in my wallet
I’m watching on an iPhone and listening through the stock Apple earbuds. Honestly, I could not hear any difference between the $50 AKG and the $1,000 Neumann.
For everyone saying they hear little to no difference:
Keep in mind that RUclips's compression primarily caps high end, the easiest thing to hear when stacking a cheap mic up with an expensive one is the smoothness of the high end.
Oh here we are again... lmao.. dude just accept the fact that a cheap mic can be as good as a pro level. Its not about the money, its about the physics...you cant put a price on basic laws of acoustics.
Lil Sheep But not worth like a 1000 or even 1100 bucks...
Please stop with the "youtube compression" myth. RUclips compression was only a problem decades ago when they compressed their sound to low-quality mp3-like shit. You know back in the day everything would randomly get super pixelated because everyone's internet was slow. That's why they had to compress audio. They stopped doing that ages ago. Now that we have enough bandwidth for HD movies, there's also enough bandwidth for 48 khz sound. I feel like everyone peddling the "RUclips compression" thing has been living under a rock the past decade. Yes, some youtube videos have really shitty audio and I get really mad but that's the way the video was uploaded; not RUclips itself.
@@MaxLohMusic You're a fool if you think RUclips doesn't massively throw out half of the audio data. Anything that is deemed not important for the end user is removed. Just like grain in video that is compressed to literally nothing but artifacts and noise. Not going to defend a mic costing a thousand dollars by any means but it seems like a lot of people on here want to believe these mics are near identical when the components in them are way cheaper and poorly put together. There is a difference in how these sound and if you had the raw video and a pair of decent headphones or monitors you would most likely hear it unless you are tone deaf.
In the end when its eq'd and mixed it will most likely be even less distinguishable but when you buy a mic like this you are doing the engineer a favor by making it much easier to mix, you are also safeguarding yourself because you know the take you did was recorded properly and optimally. Not mickey moused together with all kinds of unwanted coloring and squared off frequencies. As well as you know the mic will last you many years without distorting and falling apart.
@@TriWaZe Regarding what you said about RUclips, it's a total myth. RUclips uses regular 48 khz audio now; they're not dumb enough to think that high frequencies aren't "important for the end user", at least not since 10 years ago. Go watch any HD movie on RUclips and see if you can tell the difference in a blind test between that and another source.
Edit: it occurs to me it'd be illogical for me to claim they don't alter the audio at all for streaming, but the fact is the differences have been inaudible for a decade now as long as the video is uploaded correctly. The whole RUclips audio compression complaint is a relic of the past where they did very audibly compress sound to an mp3-like quality.
U look like Zach galifinakis
With the voice of Louis C.K
what in the hell, you are right about Louis CK.
I was trying to figure it out the whole video!! You saved me.
yeah I was thinking that the whole time
I was thinking Jon Daly
Very cleverly done. You dont realize what the point is until you do.
Thank you for always going about your videos so "intelligently". Your "unpredictability" is so refreshing.
I'd take a 100$ mic into 3000$ worth of pres/comp/ADA over a 3000$ mic into a 100$ soundcard.
BINGO
BIIINGO !!!!
Ringo!!
ok go watch pre amp comparisons, where there is even less difference
@STATiSbeats no pre amp 50 vs 3000 worth watched and zero difference. where is the bingo!???
I'm listening to this on my Beyer Dynamic DT770 Pro headphones (used in many studios) plugged in a Presonus Audiobox interface, and if there would be just sound, I'd say this was recorded with 1 microphone. At SOME points, I THOUGHT (!) I heard something more 'tinny' (not tiny), but it's only occasionally. There might obviously be more noise in the recording of the AKG, but that's hard to test here. E
SinisterSkip finally some valuable feedback
Haha I'm loving the side camera! lol
You are a voice over Jedi! loving all this great info!
Good advice. However, I previously owned an AKG P420 but based on your early reveal, I bought a Stellar X2. Until I compared them side by side I had no idea how much noise the AKG produced. The AKG was a good mic. But interestingly, I like my P170's very much and tonally sound a lot like the X2.
I'm seeing alot of people who "can hear the difference".
No you can't. Not with how RUclips compresses the audio.
Hey Mike, great video! Just as a thought, I was thinking it would be cool if you could make a video about how you got into VO and possibly some of the problems you faced as a beginner in the business.
24th December 2021 - Christmas present for my wonderful wife: an NT1a and an AKG Perception 100 - both never used in brand new out of the shop condition in their original packaging! … can you imagine that someone bought those in 2008 and never used them ??? Gosh! what a lucky punch to find those two for a total of 150,- € including shipping! 😜
Thank you very much Booth Junkie for your great videos! They help a lot! 👍🏼
When it gets brighter, it's the Neumann.
honestly after mix processing the 1% difference wouldn't matter. Used the akg on a few artists and the results were more natural sounding than other mics within the $200-$1000 range that i've heard.
finally someone speaks from experience, because majority of commenters are just presenting their assumption saying in studio it would show, so your comment would be highlighted first!
Mike, I listened without watching and couldn’t tell. I then listened while watching...couldn’t tell.
I listened using my iPhone 8 with AirPods.
It reminds me of the Taylor Guitars pallet guitar. Bob Taylor felt the real important part of the guitar wasn’t the wood but the design and craftsmanship.
So he made a guitar out of pallet wood.
Of course it sounded awesome.
My takeaways from your video: have the best studio setup you can afford, have a great voice and talent and use the mic you want.
Then listen to the end result and modify if needed.
This guy is ridiculously WONDERFUL! It is thrilling to listen to his voice. Follow his logic. Gain from his experience and simply look at him. He is scrumptiously beautiful. I'll have to give up my usual viewing habits to watch All of his videos. Thank you for showing us how it should be done.
Only thing I noticed slightly unfair, is that you were facing the AKG, pretty much the whole time, and turned slightly away from the Neumann, whether or not it was on.
I think also the warmness and tone of the voice has a lot to do with it all!
By the way, on an off note, you sound uncannily like a very famous comedian... I wonder if you've gotten that before! Anyway, keep up the great work!
Mike, I love your mic comparison videos, but-you make every mic sound REALLY good. So at the end of it, I still don’t know what to buy. LOL!
Know that was really fair. I honestly could not tell. Thank you very much.
Well as much as i hate to point out the obvious this is for voice overs not for singing it's like i've said in other youtube videos from other youtubers what you use the mics for + your voice + Hardware will determine if your sound will be amature,semi-pro,professional,commercial.
i agree with Gavaskar.
Room treatment is number one, the next thing is the talent and the colour of his/her voice. I would put mics on the third place, together with preamps audio interfaces. Mike has a great voice and knows how to deliver. To me, he sounds great on any of the mics and the client would not be able to hear the difference with different microphones. High quality/expensive mics give you a peace of mind, just like Mogami Gold mic cable, but will not give you a better voice and delivery.
So, invest your hard earned coins wisely and put more into high end gear as you grow and start to make money with it.
Peace out my brothers and sisters!
I love your videos Mike, keep up the good work.
Sani
I have the AKG Perception 100. I was just about to buy the Neuman after a while of consideration, but I asked myself "Is there really THAT much of a difference?"
I guess not lol thanks for the review.
If you have mic like this the 950$ is better spent on a fantastic preamp like a Neve1073 or better interface to track into with better AD conversion like Babyface, Prism, Lynx etc.
your explanation of the law of diminishing returns made me tear up
I like that I can barely hear any difference I mean its there but I don't have a preference as to which one sounds better its clearly all about location in this case
I’m listening on $1200 reference speakers on a $500 speaker amplifier and the difference is there and almost not even noticeable unless you’re focusing on it.
The cheap one is tinnier and brighter, but I think if you were on a budget you can fix a lot of that with a touch of EQ
Excellent subversive blind test. I'm listening on a Cambridge Audio DacMagic and a pair of Beyer DT770 Pro headphones and was totally fooled by your switching.
I was certainly hearing quite the difference. I thought my ears were messing with me until you showed the edit track. The Neumann carries a lot more body in it's reproduction (if that makes any sense) and brings in more of that gravelly texture. Each time it switched it sounded like everything was suddenly being muffled through cloth. It wasn't terrible, and my ears quickly adjusted, but it was a bit of a rude shock.
Timothy Vechik that's why in an editor you can equalise the audio to it so it sound soooooooo good
*Regarding the product, **do7.pl/NMicrophone2** came in with its hard mount nothing else, which is cool. Apart from that, and that's personal, I'm in love with the sound of the TLM-102, they have a beautiful crispy response in the high end without any harshness and a fine response in the lows. Totally reccomend it.*
in the beginning it was the AKG because it was bassier when you got to the left
the thing is: The REAL difference is how all they handle EXCESSIVE EQ comp and Limiting - THEN you value the Neumann, Brauner ...
and it looks like the U87 ;)
And if you don't want to spend so much: The blue spark
Hey, WatchMojo :)
Hah- and which waveform would you rather be working with in post. Last time I used this Neumann, it didn't need anything in post!
lol u here
Excellent point. Never sacrifice good enough in the look for excellent.
I noticed the sound quality changing before you wrote onscreen about it. Glad you eventually told us about it, I woulda thought I was imagining you switched mics.
Yes, one was definitely better than the other one. But how am I supposed to know if the $50 one or the $1000 one was the one that I liked when you never tell us which one you're using for which part?
Oh, well, it doesn't matter. I'm not planning on buying an expensive microphone anytime soon anyway. At least now I have some idea how to make a side-by-side comparison.
I won't watch a Booth Junkie video that I don't like, therefore, I hit the 👍 button first, then watch the video.
I could not hear any difference when i know you switched so much... I am happy that i found this video. Just payed 100 $ for a mic and for my needs i am more sure now that it was the best solution (for me).
I could only tell some difference between the solidness of the low end. I think that of the Neumann is better. But truth be told, I had trouble distinguishing most of the time.
I couldn't hear a difference until I put on headphones. Then the noise floor is definitely different (I presume higher on the AKG). I do hear a very LOW-frequency rumble on both of them.
So, to my ears, the high residual noise floor is definitely different but, best I can tell, the frequency response is very close.
Conclusion: For about a 100 bucks, you can get a microphone that 99.x% of your audience will qualify as great.
The auditions I send into the website I use get accepted internally all the time. My set up is an Audio Technica AT875R plugged into a Presonus Audio Box, while I sit in front of and towards my plush sofa. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
I could tell the difference the Neumann sounded a little cleaner or crisper and the AKG has a little woofer sound to it. But my ear is pretty trained! no make it or break it difference there..
Thank you so much for your videos, Mike. I'm listening a lot of them since last week. You are awesome. Thank you for all your tips!! :)
This is mostly correct. Especially as mics have gotten better and cheaper now. I've purchased a LOT of expensive mics only to resell them or send them back, and for me it's not how expensive your mic is, it's the character and personality that matters. I went through a ton of pres too, including buying a focusrite liquid channel which is supposed to emulate all of the different pres and sounds they create. My point is you just have to know how to match your equipment to your sound. Find the right combo. If you don't, no amount of money will help.
This is like trying to get a great luxury mid size sports car that's fast and is easy to park, fits your needs and personality, and someone tells you that buying a large Lexus SUV is what you want because it's more expensive has a bigger motor and great components etc. That may be a great vehicle, but it's NOT YOU. THAT is the comparison most of the time regardless of price. It's the character of the mic, the STYLE of sound and how it sounds with your voice that matters. Do some of them sit in the mix and take EQ and compression better? Yes. Do some of them sound thin on the bottom, or boomy, wooly, and weird? Yes, but they all do that regardless of price I've found. A good mid range mic that works well FOR YOU will always trump the wrong expensive ones that don't EVERY TIME.
In fact if you listen to Grammy award winning producers and engineers they'll tell you the SAME thing. They can buy and use whatever the hell they want, and once you get rid of the price of the equipment for a moment you can think of them all as colors and syles in your pallet for painting a picture. You can make a great record with a thousand dollar mic or less. Lots of people use the Shure sm7B which is like $300! I think MJ used that mic on thriller. It's been used by Metallica etc etc. Takes lots of heat before it distorts. People just like that sound I guess. I also read that U2 made one of their records with an sm58 running through a good pre on lead vocals. Probably a Neve 1073. Anyway, just find your color, character, and style you want and roll with it. But if you don't believe me I don't care. Do you.
"Dead/clean" is perfect! Why would you want a vocal booth that colors the sound? Just add any desired effects later at render time: it is trivial in the DAW!
If your room adds coloration that your client doesn't want, you would have to re-record!
You can tell the difference on studio monitoring headphones. The cheaper mic is just a lot tinnier and a little less detailed. I didn't actually notice the text until the revelation at the four minute mark, I partially blame it on your hypnotizing beard.
Would not use a TLM103 for VO or vocals.. it's transformerless, and it rings at 600hz.. that MKH 416 is probably better. Not sure what that $50 AKG. I have a Neumann U89i I'm selling if you want a REALLY nice VO mic.. it has a slightly smaller cap than a U87.. perfect for voice! And sounds LOVELY!
When the text said "Now!" @ 2:16 I could hear the internal noise floor raise, the mid-bass was a bit higher, and mid-high was a little muted (I'm guessing that was the $50). Well... I noticed after I boosted the volume on RUclips and Windows to 100%... and change my audio settings to 24-bit 192-kHz (Windows keep changing to 44-kHz after updates)... and maybe my AKG Q701s helped... shit that would be impossible to tell with worse headphones. The Q701 aren't really the best cans out there, but open back really helped with this.
Tbh I swap back and forth between and SM58 and an MXL770, just depends on the noise level around me and the room that I’m in at the time. They work for what I need them for. I’m sure I’ll upgrade later on, but it’s not a necessity for me.
I am listening to this on my $350 SONY WH-1000XM3 noise-cancelling headphones and I hear no $950 difference in audio quality. The Neumann sounds a bit better when it comes to the deep sounds but the difference is minuscule. They sound almost identical to a non-audiophile like me.
Awesome video, but one suggestion I have is to change the colour of the text from just white to white with a black outline. Much easier to read on any colour background. Makes a huge difference.
I'm definitely always going with the Neumann..thats like if you are skydiving, are you going with the $1000 parachute or the $50 one ..I'm gong with a quality name with quality parts and build
Parts are the same pretty much. Both microphones utilise Shoeps circuit. And parts are pretty much same because they are fck cheap. Even 1% like parts are super cheap, actually parts that claim to be better like audiophile shit have tolerances of like 20-40% and well are shit.
Price come not from quality. But from brand recognition, few economic paradoxes ect. In another words Sennheiser(owner of Neumann brand and actual manufacturer) will sell more 2000$ microphones than 200$ microphones and that ofc mean higher profit so surely they do that.
I just bought the TLM-103 and tbh with you it sounds better but $1050 better meh. But there is a good warm difference.
I can hear the difference when you're swtiching but only with headphones. Neumann is brighter. AKG P100 is warmer. AKG sounds better to me as i like warm signature. Just like my Elac speakers.
the most important element to truly see where a mic shines is your pre amp...i will always go with Neuman,the definition in the waveform speaks for itself.
my untreated basement and $50 blue snowball seem to do the trick for me lol. Maybe one day when this hobby of mine brings in some decent money ill upgrade to something a little better.
Ofc I heard. I bet after countdown is Neumann
I think that you mentioned in a lot of videos that the space in which you record is way more important than the mic that you use. People are always looking for the mic to change their outlook on audio versus the area in which the recording is taking place. I could have an outstanding mic, but in a non-treated and completely open area, it would make my voice boomy and overly resonant. I experienced this in radio and television news reporting classes in my university in which we recorded our news sessions in very dead, audio treated rooms and used very basic microphones. Ten times out of ten, the audio was completely fine, though not the crispiest audio ever. We still got a very natural broadcast sound out of our sessions regardless of the time of day or setup because the rooms made the difference.
couldn’t tell on my older iphone but it’s curious too how you favored using the TLM more often..
I bought a Rode Podcaster and to be honest it is exceptional value, flat response across the board , very good pattern and pop rejection and cost $110 with damper mount to fit on my boom ,
Yes there are cheaper and there are certainly much more expensive BUT in real terms like your comparison here there is very little difference in the Audio (at least in the Video - listening locally with cans may be significantly different )
OK. I listened again through a $120 Audio-Technica set of cans and I still couldn’t hear a difference. The Neumann waves look louder, but I couldn’t hear any difference.
I see a lot of guys in here (and all over RUclips) arguing audio theory, but the Law of Diminishing Returns stands
I have to admit it again ... I really love this guy ! I mean the information he delivers.
Hi Booth Junkie.
I know this video is a few years old but I believe these questions remains relevant.
I often read... *A mic is only as good as the driver & setup behind it* . How much of the statement is true in this video?
How important, using a scale of one to ten (ten being top priority), is the noise cancelation in your surrounding area? By this I mean to the extreme of adding sound absorbent materials.
Thanks.
it's equally important, mic and audio pre amp and even a cable...if we are talking home set up...
The law of diminishing returns is pretty much the same as the 80/20-rule, right? Means: In order to achieve 80% quality you have to invest 20%, but for the last 20% quality boost you have to invest 80% more.
I was hearing it from the monitor speakers... didn't feel a difference, I just connected the hd598se and to be honest... I can't say which one I like the most... and can't say which one is which one...
AKG picking up more low end. Never liked the mid presence of the tlm 103. Doesn't suit many voices but definitely cuts through mixing for television.
Put a low cut on the AKG and its sounds quite good for the price point.
The Neumann has a warmth to it that the AKG just doesnt have. But, if I where a starting broadcaster or voice over gal/guy, the AKG mic sounds pretty straight.
You are amazin' raisins, man! Sorry if you don't like raisins. Just a dumb rhyme I came up with. But even though I'm older than dirt, The connection between cardioid And cardiopulmonary Or cardiac Never occurred to me! Many thanks for that great reminder
If you put them both in your home studio, you' definitely hear the difference. I have found some great music on youtube, bought the CD and was surprised at how much more dynamic the audio was on the CD. youtube audio is audio, but apparently not complete audio.
It's very compressed. It's like the difference between listening to an mp3 or streaming service vs flac or vinyl.
I will say I was wearing my studio headphones with the volume pretty loud to hear the difference. I can definitely head it as it switches there's this underlying hiss like white noise and then it switches back and it disappears. BUT I am wearing studio headphones with the volume right up. Playing out of my phone of laptop speakers I can't hear it.