What Paul said here I think explains why a stereo system can never sound like live music, it's not just our gear (speakers, amps, etc,) but mostly because how the sound is captured in the first place.
As Paul said all microphones have a distinctive sound that is why a certain studio in London has collected so many microphones over the years they have a large room with them all stored in. They also have a artisans across the UK who maintain these electronic beauties. (see Rick Beato)
Some old recordings, like 'Big Band Cole' where the vocals sound so amazing, that I think that the progress in technology has for a part disappeared by less optimal solutions and complicated, large circuits, that don't sound great. A studio/label that I think sets a very high standard is the German Stockfisch Studio. Their recordings are absolutely amazing to me. And they prove that a 44.1khz 24 bit track can sound so good that there is objectively no need for DSD whatsoever.
The biggest improvement in microphones is getting the high frequency resonances octaves away from the necessary bandwidth. The old Neumanns, Telefunkens and AKGs had resonances between 25 and 30K - exactly where aliasing in early digital (44.1K/48K and 50K) was a huge problem. The new microphones help lose artifacts that were part of early digital recording. This was never an issue with tape as the recording head gap was a brick wall filter that kept the resonances out.
I have used many microphones in my studio over the past 30+ years. Paul is right about DPA microphones for some applications anyway. I use DPA DDK4000s for recording drums only. That said, the AKG C12 Tube condenser microphone is by far the most accurate and best for recording vocals. I use other microphones depending on the instrument or amplifier speaker being recorded. There is no one-trick pony when it comes to microphones. And of course, some sources are plugged directly into the control board interface and don't require a microphone.
I had a mate who used to "borrow" a pair of Bruel Kjaer 1/2 inch condenser measurement microphones from work, back in 1984 ish. They used a 200V phantom power were ridiculously flat and could take huge SPL levels. He would go to his local pub, cross them over the bar and feed them into a Revox converted to half track. He got some very interesting and natural live jazz recordings. New mics will always have an advantage, but the old mic's were not lacking. These were (from memory) over £600 for just the capsule, so about £2600 ($3200) per capsule in todays money.
I use the (fairly new to the market) Warm Audio w-87 which is supposed to imitate a Neumann mic. Sadly, I think the mic has ground issues thus it makes a loud pop noise every now and then. It used to also make a grinding noise which for some reason disappeared. I’ve not been able to use the mic much. I think I got a bad one, but it did not show any issues until about a year later. $500 down the drain unless I find someone who can fix the ground issue.
I think a lot of recording studios prefer the vintage or re-issued microphones. A mic can measure really well but not sound that great. Even the old vintage Neumann mic's will sound different from mic to mic in the same model. My brother has a collection of mostly vintage or re-issue microphones. There are so many variables such as the diaphragm, capsule, tube, power supply etc. The re-issues of the Nemanns are very good but their is a caveat. Even if they are within "spec" from the factory they can all sound different, some good some not so good. Klaus Heyne is the master of tuning these re-issues to their optimum sound performance. If you are really into it, this is probably the best way to go. There are not shortcuts. Just my two cents.
The Sennheiser you're talking about is the MD441. And they are just dynamic, not condensers. (Thought they cost as much as a condenser.. most $$ dynamic out there)
@@drdelewded The MKH condenser line started in the early 1960s and was improved in the 80s. The hypercardioid MKH 50 started in 1988. And in the video he says "they've been around for 30 years" which would be about accurate.
Back in the early '80s I bought a Sony TC-D5M cassette recorder and a pair of MD441 mics to record Dead shows and other live music, and I still have them. I'm now building a live music venue with full recording and streaming capability, and I'm probably going to use the MD441s to record the room ambiance track because they can handle high SPL.
@@alex_stanley They are great microphones, I bought a pair for snare micing and as my personal live vocal mic... I stop performing live, but got the mics
Do any modern mics lean towards a warmer sound signature? Any suggestions? I started looking for one that can reproduce my nylon guitar tone properly, and in the budget range I have not been impressed so might have to get something more expensive.
There’s a number of modern microphone tube preamps. I don’t know if call them ‘warm’ as much as smooth. You can also roll tubes to somewhat refine sound. Of course the sound engineer ultimately controls the recording master with mixing board/software
Most studios don’t care about sound quality. Audio is over processed and the recording equipment isn’t particularly audiophile quality. I think for most music this is the limitation. Even remastered sacd have issues where it is remastered from lower bitrate and upsampled.
@@drdelewded Seriously. Also, I'd like to add that old audiophiles don't like new music.. soooooo what exactly are they commenting on? Would they like new music if the recording sounded like it was from the 70's? That's a silly way to listen to music. Also, some new music does sound like it was recorded in the 70's, but these dudes wouldn't know it because they don't explore anything new. It's their loss, but why do we have to listen to them whine?
@@greggiorgio1846 They listen to crappy jazz that embaresses actual jazz fans. Gear Slutz and nothing else. They love shitting on professional audio people, granted we shit on them too. But unless they are hearing live acoustic music in an amazing room , they aremt.. shitty rooms with amplified instruments, they cant say anything about studio recordings..
How in the actual holy immaculate $#&% do they measure a microphone at 100k? I wanna hear those tweeters or at least see the ridiculous compensation curves involved in the process. And 2Hz from something the size of an electrette? Really? Somebody help me out here.
There are ultrasonic speakers out there, especially for measuring purposes. And smaller microphone capsules aren’t worse at recording very low sounds, in fact they (generally speaking) have a more linear frequency response, although they are noisier. That’s why Studio microphones usually have a certain capsule size, but measuring microphones are much smaller (because noise isn’t such a big deal there)
Regular follower of PS Audio’ s Paul McGowan further down south from Uganda. Could it be true that smart students don’t ask questions ? 😂 Thanks for the thought
Antarctica has its own radio station. It’s the only radio station on the Continent. That radio station has an interesting history you can read about on their website.
It would be interesting to know if microphones more accurately capture sound than speakers can reproduce it. When I have recorded music onto analog tape, the tape recording always sounds warmer and subtly less crisp. No matter what analog tape deck I use; and I don't think I'll get into recording digitally.. Is warm just a inherent part of analog? Actually I believe that microphones are going to cause the world many problems and perhaps someday, even the ultimate catastrophe. They have technology to analyze voice recordings and then it can simulate your voice so well that it sounds exactly like you.. Or like a President or someone in charge of something top secret or vital. This kind of technology serves no real good purpose, and if our lawmakers didn't have their heads up their you know where, deceptive potentially catastrophic technologies like this could be disaster for everyone Are they going to wait until a disaster happens. It should be made illegal and banned. The unforseen possibilities for something awful seem limitless.
I doubt if a smartphone's sound capabilities can touch the gear from 20 years ago, unless you rig up external mics and go into the phone digitally. Video can be good, though, but only if you shoot wide angle.
![If you can't hear this then you're not an audiophile [See description for link to followup video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/48PxwspDvrE/mqdefault.jpg)
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
What Paul said here I think explains why a stereo system can never sound like live music, it's not just our gear (speakers, amps, etc,) but mostly because how the sound is captured in the first place.
… and add to the problem the out of phased instruments on each track and possibly out of phased masterings…😢
Absolutely!😊
Very good information Paul. Thanks!
I miss the whispering at the end
😂 😂😂
The New mic cant hang with the whispers😂
Careless Whispers
As Paul said all microphones have a distinctive sound that is why a certain studio in London has collected so many microphones over the years they have a large room with them all stored in. They also have a artisans across the UK who maintain these electronic beauties. (see Rick Beato)
Some old recordings, like 'Big Band Cole' where the vocals sound so amazing, that I think that the progress in technology has for a part disappeared by less optimal solutions and complicated, large circuits, that don't sound great. A studio/label that I think sets a very high standard is the German Stockfisch Studio. Their recordings are absolutely amazing to me. And they prove that a 44.1khz 24 bit track can sound so good that there is objectively no need for DSD whatsoever.
The biggest improvement in microphones is getting the high frequency resonances octaves away from the necessary bandwidth. The old Neumanns, Telefunkens and AKGs had resonances between 25 and 30K - exactly where aliasing in early digital (44.1K/48K and 50K) was a huge problem. The new microphones help lose artifacts that were part of early digital recording. This was never an issue with tape as the recording head gap was a brick wall filter that kept the resonances out.
Lewitt is making some very cool stuff lately.
Oooh that 1040 😯
I have used many microphones in my studio over the past 30+ years. Paul is right about DPA microphones for some applications anyway. I use DPA DDK4000s for recording drums only. That said, the AKG C12 Tube condenser microphone is by far the most accurate and best for recording vocals. I use other microphones depending on the instrument or amplifier speaker being recorded. There is no one-trick pony when it comes to microphones. And of course, some sources are plugged directly into the control board interface and don't require a microphone.
Hello, Neumann!
Hello, Jerry 😐
DPA is the successor of Bruel & Kjaer microphone branch. DPA = Danish Professional Audio. Some of their mics are still B&K deveolpments.
I had a mate who used to "borrow" a pair of Bruel Kjaer 1/2 inch condenser measurement microphones from work, back in 1984 ish. They used a 200V phantom power were ridiculously flat and could take huge SPL levels. He would go to his local pub, cross them over the bar and feed them into a Revox converted to half track. He got some very interesting and natural live jazz recordings. New mics will always have an advantage, but the old mic's were not lacking. These were (from memory) over £600 for just the capsule, so about £2600 ($3200) per capsule in todays money.
B&K is now called DPA
I use the (fairly new to the market) Warm Audio w-87 which is supposed to imitate a Neumann mic.
Sadly, I think the mic has ground issues thus it makes a loud pop noise every now and then. It used to also make a grinding noise which for some reason disappeared. I’ve not been able to use the mic much. I think I got a bad one, but it did not show any issues until about a year later. $500 down the drain unless I find someone who can fix the ground issue.
Check your phantom power supply.
I think a lot of recording studios prefer the vintage or re-issued microphones. A mic can measure really well but not sound that great. Even the old vintage Neumann mic's will sound different from mic to mic in the same model. My brother has a collection of mostly vintage or re-issue microphones. There are so many variables such as the diaphragm, capsule, tube, power supply etc. The re-issues of the Nemanns are very good but their is a caveat. Even if they are within "spec" from the factory they can all sound different, some good some not so good. Klaus Heyne is the master of tuning these re-issues to their optimum sound performance. If you are really into it, this is probably the best way to go. There are not shortcuts. Just my two cents.
Sounds like a Sennheiser MD441. They’ve actually been around for over 50 years now.
He wrongly stated it was a condenser though.
@@drdelewded oh No, he prob a fake, where is ps gone??? 😂
@@drdelewded He called it a “dynamic condenser” which is something that doesn’t exist. Hey, he’s 75
@@gotham61 so he was 18 when the mic came out haha
The Sennheiser you're talking about is the MD441. And they are just dynamic, not condensers. (Thought they cost as much as a condenser.. most $$ dynamic out there)
He could also refer to some hypercardioid models of the MKH series (which are indeed condensers).
@@Fastvoice but he's not, they weren't around 40+ years ago
@@drdelewded The MKH condenser line started in the early 1960s and was improved in the 80s. The hypercardioid MKH 50 started in 1988. And in the video he says "they've been around for 30 years" which would be about accurate.
Back in the early '80s I bought a Sony TC-D5M cassette recorder and a pair of MD441 mics to record Dead shows and other live music, and I still have them. I'm now building a live music venue with full recording and streaming capability, and I'm probably going to use the MD441s to record the room ambiance track because they can handle high SPL.
@@alex_stanley They are great microphones, I bought a pair for snare micing and as my personal live vocal mic... I stop performing live, but got the mics
What about the TUBE microphone?
I'd so love it if Paul and Dave Rat were watching each other's channels................. maybe they are
Do any modern mics lean towards a warmer sound signature? Any suggestions? I started looking for one that can reproduce my nylon guitar tone properly, and in the budget range I have not been impressed so might have to get something more expensive.
There’s a number of modern microphone tube preamps. I don’t know if call them ‘warm’ as much as smooth. You can also roll tubes to somewhat refine sound. Of course the sound engineer ultimately controls the recording master with mixing board/software
Most studios don’t care about sound quality. Audio is over processed and the recording equipment isn’t particularly audiophile quality. I think for most music this is the limitation. Even remastered sacd have issues where it is remastered from lower bitrate and upsampled.
No
@@drdelewded Seriously. Also, I'd like to add that old audiophiles don't like new music.. soooooo what exactly are they commenting on? Would they like new music if the recording sounded like it was from the 70's? That's a silly way to listen to music. Also, some new music does sound like it was recorded in the 70's, but these dudes wouldn't know it because they don't explore anything new. It's their loss, but why do we have to listen to them whine?
@@greggiorgio1846 They listen to crappy jazz that embaresses actual jazz fans. Gear Slutz and nothing else. They love shitting on professional audio people, granted we shit on them too. But unless they are hearing live acoustic music in an amazing room , they aremt.. shitty rooms with amplified instruments, they cant say anything about studio recordings..
How about SOYUZ and MANLEY microphones 🎤?
They are great mics in their own right, but are modelled after Neumann and AKG mics from 60 plus years ago
How in the actual holy immaculate $#&% do they measure a microphone at 100k? I wanna hear those tweeters or at least see the ridiculous compensation curves involved in the process. And 2Hz from something the size of an electrette? Really?
Somebody help me out here.
There are ultrasonic speakers out there, especially for measuring purposes. And smaller microphone capsules aren’t worse at recording very low sounds, in fact they (generally speaking) have a more linear frequency response, although they are noisier. That’s why Studio microphones usually have a certain capsule size, but measuring microphones are much smaller (because noise isn’t such a big deal there)
Patiently waiting for some questions from Nepal or Uganda. Apparently there are no BS Audio fans in Antartica.
It's PS audio.
@@c.sec73 Not any more. These scripted questions from non existent people justifies a rebranding. BS Audio it is !!
Regular follower of PS Audio’ s Paul McGowan further down south from Uganda. Could it be true that smart students don’t ask questions ? 😂 Thanks for the thought
Antarctica has its own radio station. It’s the only radio station on the Continent.
That radio station has an interesting history you can read about on their website.
@@edgarortiz4681 You need to get a life.
Why upload this twice?
He was waiting for your question??
It would be interesting to know if microphones more accurately capture sound than speakers can reproduce it. When I have recorded music onto analog tape, the tape recording always sounds warmer and subtly less crisp. No matter what analog tape deck I use; and I don't think I'll get into recording digitally.. Is warm just a inherent part of analog?
Actually I believe that microphones are going to cause the world many problems and perhaps someday, even the ultimate catastrophe. They have technology to analyze voice recordings and then it can simulate your voice so well that it sounds exactly like you.. Or like a President or someone in charge of something top secret or vital. This kind of technology serves no real good purpose, and if our lawmakers didn't have their heads up their you know where, deceptive potentially catastrophic technologies like this could be disaster for everyone Are they going to wait until a disaster happens. It should be made illegal and banned. The unforseen possibilities for something awful seem limitless.
Nowadays people can make better video and sound on a smart phone than professional movie and audio gear could do a couple of decades ago.
I doubt if a smartphone's sound capabilities can touch the gear from 20 years ago, unless you rig up external mics and go into the phone digitally. Video can be good, though, but only if you shoot wide angle.
Why don’t you retire are you sick of working?
Here First 👋
So what? Darn, weird people.