I think it'll be interesting for me to post this, then come back tomorrow to see the results. - I have a ranking of B, A then C as a professional producer and field recordist looking specifically for an LDC vocal mic. B has the widest frequency response with detail both high and low, flat with a 2-3db bump in the highs I think. Best low end. A has a rounded vintage tone with a smoothened high end, and less low frequency detail. It's focus is in the mids. Vintage with low detail, very pleasant and lack of fatigue. C has a harsh upper frequency response that would not EQ well, but would be excellent for beginners. I figure this would be either the cheapest or the most modern. May have high frequency distortion like my budget NT1-A that I also mistakenly chose as a beginner. For you I'd be choosing B and dropping the highs slightly for VO use, especially use that requires an impact - and A for long form content like an Audiobook.
I picked the Soyuz 017 as B right off the bat. I actually did this from watching your other reviews on the Soyuz 013 and 017, definitely has a signature sound. Just ordered mine from Vintage and it will arrive today 10/31, you have me sold on the Hyper capsule, but I’ll hold off until I hear the sound and see if I really need the bump. You videos are incredibly awesome!!!
Awesome comparison! I took some notes before reaching the end: - The sibilance on "C" was like an ice pick in the ear on my HD600s. Every hard 's', 'd', 't', and plosive made me wince; but the sections without those sounds were rather pleasant! I guessed that one was a transformer-less mic. (And because I think the 4400 is the only transformer-less mic from the lot, that one was obvious) - "A" sounded like it had some unpleasantness in the 3-7kHz region, but it seemed rather tame by comparison. 'Sounded like it would take EQ, compression, or de-essing well. This one sounded to me like it would sit well in a busy soundscape with the least amount of corrective work. I should have guessed this was the U-89... I've used a TLM-170R more than a few times and it has a similar sound. - In a vacuum "B" was by far my favorite. Very "radio voice" sounding, comparatively speaking. Lots of mid to low-mid energy. In hindsight though, I don't think it would take much work to clean this one up! A little high-pass or shelf EQing the low end, and a little high shelving to taste might even be all it needs depending on how dense the program is. I'm impressed! Any idea what the current situation is with warranties and new stock from Soyuz given the war and the associated sanctions? Are they manufacturing outside of Russia now?
Great ears! Nice job picking up on the transformerless sound not smoothing over those faults. And yes, the u89 takes EQ probably better than any other mic I've had so it's not as impressive in its raw form as it is when you really carve out a sound on it. And you're also right about the Soyuz. A lttle EQ nip, tuck and lift would take the raw signal to a finished sound pretty quickly. As far as I know, there aren't any issues with Soyuz stock and they haven't suffered from any sanctions due to the conflict which may have something to do with being owned by Americans or something. I don't really know. I'm pretty sure they're still manufacturing in Russia and it seems a lot of people turned away from them because they perceive it as being supportive of a war that nobody wants.
Thank you! Truth be told, the 89 wasn't even being used to its full potential since it really comes to life when you EQ it and carve out the sound you want from it.
Wow! I got literally every one wrong. Very interesting. I would choose the Soyuz in this comparison, though all of them needed a de-esser. I'm glad you didn't use one. Raw, baby! Love this!
Gary, it sure does. The other two are mics that take EQ extremely well and are designed to be sculpted to sound like what you need, but C has more of a ready-to-go tone without finessing.
Wow, these comments really prove there is no "best," only "favorite." For me, mic A absolutely slayed. I was disappointed in the 017, sounded an little boomy and uneven compared to the Neumann. And throw a de-esser on the 4400 and it's definitely a high-value VO tool! Always impressed by sE mics.
sE makes some outstanding mics that offer a lot of bang for your buck, but in a scenario where you need to pick one mic to open a door for you, it's hard to bet against a properly EQ'd u89 in any situation.
Holy shit. I ranked them C, B, A. Dude this is diminishing returns in action. When a $279 microphone performs (subjectively) at mics that are $3000 and up. SE4400 is the same as the SE4100 which you can find for like $279.
Mr. Mic Pro, first of all, thanks for videos like this! I see you've used a lot of microphones for voiceovers. Which one is the best for you? And which one has the most transparent and linear frequency response? And which one is best for low, bass voices?
My pleasure! Right now, I feel like the Lauten Clarion is my favorite mic on my voice for VO work, and if you're looking for something really transparent that will allow you to sculpt whatever sound you're looking for, take a gander at the Serena mic that I just posted about here: ruclips.net/video/nWmGdxh92BQ/видео.html
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff LOL well... at least the more expensive one was the last on my list... which means I can walk for a little longer :) Thanks for doing this!
I got all of them right, but the sound of all the microphones has their own place in any giving situation. You are gonna EQ the Microphone anyways. For voice over just depends on your voice and for music it's kind of a shame to take away what makes the Microphone sound so Great. Sad True. I know you said that before and it's didn't really dawn on me, that's what we have to do while mixing. That's said any Microphone will work. Great Job.
Thank you for lending your ears to this little experiment. And you're right, any of these mics would do fine for a task like this. A lot of the time, these comparisons aren't as "ear-opening" as one may wish and are kinda mostly just fodder for those of us with severe microphone addictions and fetishes to get some kind of fix.
My guess would be that: A) sE 4400 B) Neumann u89 C) Soyuz 017 FET. I can't tell any difference between B) and C) to be honest. Will you reveal with is which anytime soon, Mark?
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff Mark, unfortunately the video thumbnail is still visible for me, but I am assuming A) Neumann B) Soyuz 017 C) sE 4400? Is that rigth? Thank you for your marvelous work. EDIT: on my cell, the end cover is in the bottom left corner, while on PC it is right in the middle.
@@EnglishEloquenceMoscow Thank you! And you're very welcome! Perhaps refresh and reload the video to see if it's been updated. I'd rather not post a spoiler in the comments revealing which is which, if possible. Given that you saw it correctly on your cell, I'm hoping it's been fixed worldwide.
Way too much sibilance on the 4400. Could use a de-esser with these. U89 sounds most pleasant out of the box, followed by Soyuz. I wouldn't get the 4400, though.
Just found I was right!! U89 had that beautiful full mellow tone. B felt a tad bit brighter and more forward. C. The sibliance about destroyed my eardrum so I assumed the cheapest of the lot. LOL
@@Tacitade I goofed by having an end card pop up over the reveal, but I've fixed it now so you can see which is which at the end of the video. I'd rather not say in the comments and be a spoiler for someone else.
I think it'll be interesting for me to post this, then come back tomorrow to see the results.
-
I have a ranking of B, A then C as a professional producer and field recordist looking specifically for an LDC vocal mic.
B has the widest frequency response with detail both high and low, flat with a 2-3db bump in the highs I think. Best low end.
A has a rounded vintage tone with a smoothened high end, and less low frequency detail. It's focus is in the mids. Vintage with low detail, very pleasant and lack of fatigue.
C has a harsh upper frequency response that would not EQ well, but would be excellent for beginners. I figure this would be either the cheapest or the most modern. May have high frequency distortion like my budget NT1-A that I also mistakenly chose as a beginner.
For you I'd be choosing B and dropping the highs slightly for VO use, especially use that requires an impact - and A for long form content like an Audiobook.
Great ears and great suggestions.
I picked the Soyuz 017 as B right off the bat. I actually did this from watching your other reviews on the Soyuz 013 and 017, definitely has a signature sound. Just ordered mine from Vintage and it will arrive today 10/31, you have me sold on the Hyper capsule, but I’ll hold off until I hear the sound and see if I really need the bump. You videos are incredibly awesome!!!
Thank you so much! You are going to love it. Let me know what you think of it after you’ve had a chance to use it on a couple of things.
Awesome comparison! I took some notes before reaching the end:
- The sibilance on "C" was like an ice pick in the ear on my HD600s. Every hard 's', 'd', 't', and plosive made me wince; but the sections without those sounds were rather pleasant! I guessed that one was a transformer-less mic. (And because I think the 4400 is the only transformer-less mic from the lot, that one was obvious)
- "A" sounded like it had some unpleasantness in the 3-7kHz region, but it seemed rather tame by comparison. 'Sounded like it would take EQ, compression, or de-essing well. This one sounded to me like it would sit well in a busy soundscape with the least amount of corrective work. I should have guessed this was the U-89... I've used a TLM-170R more than a few times and it has a similar sound.
- In a vacuum "B" was by far my favorite. Very "radio voice" sounding, comparatively speaking. Lots of mid to low-mid energy. In hindsight though, I don't think it would take much work to clean this one up! A little high-pass or shelf EQing the low end, and a little high shelving to taste might even be all it needs depending on how dense the program is. I'm impressed!
Any idea what the current situation is with warranties and new stock from Soyuz given the war and the associated sanctions? Are they manufacturing outside of Russia now?
Great ears! Nice job picking up on the transformerless sound not smoothing over those faults. And yes, the u89 takes EQ probably better than any other mic I've had so it's not as impressive in its raw form as it is when you really carve out a sound on it. And you're also right about the Soyuz. A lttle EQ nip, tuck and lift would take the raw signal to a finished sound pretty quickly. As far as I know, there aren't any issues with Soyuz stock and they haven't suffered from any sanctions due to the conflict which may have something to do with being owned by Americans or something. I don't really know. I'm pretty sure they're still manufacturing in Russia and it seems a lot of people turned away from them because they perceive it as being supportive of a war that nobody wants.
Great shootout Mark! The U89 gets my vote although your voice sounds great on all three
Thank you! Truth be told, the 89 wasn't even being used to its full potential since it really comes to life when you EQ it and carve out the sound you want from it.
Wow! I got literally every one wrong. Very interesting. I would choose the Soyuz in this comparison, though all of them needed a de-esser. I'm glad you didn't use one. Raw, baby! Love this!
Raw like sushi, baby. Can’t go wrong with the Soyuz. And yeah, I need a De esser on everything. LOL.
@ hahahaha. Me too!
B stood out to me the most.
B is certainly no slouch.
"C" has the finished VO sound; the sound that can go straight from the booth to the mix !
Gary, it sure does. The other two are mics that take EQ extremely well and are designed to be sculpted to sound like what you need, but C has more of a ready-to-go tone without finessing.
My guess is and in order of preference : A - Neumann , C - sE Electronics, B - Soyuz
Nice picks! Thank you for lending your ears to this experiment.
Wow, these comments really prove there is no "best," only "favorite." For me, mic A absolutely slayed. I was disappointed in the 017, sounded an little boomy and uneven compared to the Neumann. And throw a de-esser on the 4400 and it's definitely a high-value VO tool! Always impressed by sE mics.
sE makes some outstanding mics that offer a lot of bang for your buck, but in a scenario where you need to pick one mic to open a door for you, it's hard to bet against a properly EQ'd u89 in any situation.
Holy shit. I ranked them C, B, A. Dude this is diminishing returns in action. When a $279 microphone performs (subjectively) at mics that are $3000 and up. SE4400 is the same as the SE4100 which you can find for like $279.
Yeah man, the 4400 really comes out of this looking like a hell of a deal.
Mr. Mic Pro, first of all, thanks for videos like this! I see you've used a lot of microphones for voiceovers. Which one is the best for you? And which one has the most transparent and linear frequency response? And which one is best for low, bass voices?
My pleasure! Right now, I feel like the Lauten Clarion is my favorite mic on my voice for VO work, and if you're looking for something really transparent that will allow you to sculpt whatever sound you're looking for, take a gander at the Serena mic that I just posted about here: ruclips.net/video/nWmGdxh92BQ/видео.html
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff @MarkYoshimotoNemcoff I have not watched the video. thank you, master!
All three sound great, the differences aren’t too extreme
I agree. And it kind of ends up as a win for the 4400, hanging in there so well with mics that cost many times more.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff Totally agree on that point. Technology really has improved
Looks like my favourite was the Soyuz. I had Mic C in second place and Mic A in third.
Can't go wrong picking the Soyuz.
This surprised me, hmm
I'll need to listen a few more times before I form an opinion
Jar! Looking forward to your thoughts, man. There are no wrong answers here.
My favourites were B, C and A... so I guess I won't have to sell an arm and a leg for my favourite mic :)
So you have picked "D: All of the Above". Please form a line to the right for limb removal. Today's special is two feet for the price of one.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff LOL well... at least the more expensive one was the last on my list... which means I can walk for a little longer :)
Thanks for doing this!
I got all of them right, but the sound of all the microphones has their own place in any giving situation. You are gonna EQ the Microphone anyways. For voice over just depends on your voice and for music it's kind of a shame to take away what makes the Microphone sound so Great. Sad True. I know you said that before and it's didn't really dawn on me, that's what we have to do while mixing. That's said any Microphone will work. Great Job.
Thank you for lending your ears to this little experiment. And you're right, any of these mics would do fine for a task like this. A lot of the time, these comparisons aren't as "ear-opening" as one may wish and are kinda mostly just fodder for those of us with severe microphone addictions and fetishes to get some kind of fix.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff LOL
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff The Jay Leno of Microphones.
Please do
Lauten audio eden 386
Lauten audio fc 387
lauten clarion
And u87ai
And which takes eq the best please
Fingers X'd it happens. As I don't have an Atlantis or Eden, I can't say if it will, but we can hope.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff i think this comparisons will be elite
Did you do any processing or is this raw?
Raw. No EQ either. 60hz HPF going into the preamp. No post.
My guess would be that: A) sE 4400 B) Neumann u89 C) Soyuz 017 FET. I can't tell any difference between B) and C) to be honest. Will you reveal with is which anytime soon, Mark?
My bad. I accidentally had the end card covering the reveal, but I've fixed that so now you can see which mic is which at the end of the video.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff Mark, unfortunately the video thumbnail is still visible for me, but I am assuming A) Neumann B) Soyuz 017 C) sE 4400? Is that rigth? Thank you for your marvelous work. EDIT: on my cell, the end cover is in the bottom left corner, while on PC it is right in the middle.
@@EnglishEloquenceMoscow Thank you! And you're very welcome! Perhaps refresh and reload the video to see if it's been updated. I'd rather not post a spoiler in the comments revealing which is which, if possible. Given that you saw it correctly on your cell, I'm hoping it's been fixed worldwide.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff Thank you, Mark! Will do.
Way too much sibilance on the 4400. Could use a de-esser with these. U89 sounds most pleasant out of the box, followed by Soyuz. I wouldn't get the 4400, though.
For me a de-esser is a necessity. These are all unprocessed though so yes, it needs one for sure.
Okay haven’t seen the answers but my guesses…
A. U89
B. Soyuz
C. 4400
How’d I do???
Just found I was right!! U89 had that beautiful full mellow tone. B felt a tad bit brighter and more forward. C. The sibliance about destroyed my eardrum so I assumed the cheapest of the lot. LOL
Dwayne, Nicely done. Good ears!
I feel that you're smiling every time I hear you talk into a mic. Is that so?
That's very true. Unless, it's a Rode mic, in which case it's all tears and sobbing.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff yeah, that time preservation society video is off the hook
From my ears? I liked C the most.
Great choice. C is very pleasing to listen to.
@@MarkYoshimotoNemcoff c 4400??
@@Tacitade I goofed by having an end card pop up over the reveal, but I've fixed it now so you can see which is which at the end of the video. I'd rather not say in the comments and be a spoiler for someone else.
This has been so easy to demistifiate ✊
Demistifiate on, brother!