Oktava Ml-52 Ribbon mic opinions?
res07r64
general consensus on them was. I know that the oktava's can be kind of
spotty, but I read a really good review of this mic in some British audio
magazine (can't remember the title). Am I wasting my time buying this mic?
Is it worth the $300, or should I just save up for a Coles or a Royer?
David Newton
or maybe even (if you're lucky) a M160 - personally I would explore that
route!!
dave n
Scott Dorsey
>For $300 I would think that you could pick up a used Beyer M260 / M500,
>or maybe even (if you're lucky) a M160 - personally I would explore that
>route!!
You can even get a new grey market M260 for that kind of money.
I have not used the ML-52, but I have an old ML-219 and it's a fun mike
to have around. I use it now and then, and I am glad I have it. If the
ML-52 is similar, I should probably get one.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Michael Vladimirsky
The ML-52 is a bidirectiobal mic, which is very much unlike ml-19 (ml-219).
ML-19 was designed as a general purpose mic with more or less neutral tonal
balance. A sort of Sm57 with a ribbon transducer.
The "new" Ml-52 was obviously an attempt to recreate the ML-11 and ML-15
bassy sound.
This microphone produces, mainly, lower mids.
If ML-52's transformer was as good as they used in the ML-11s, the mic would
probably be as good.
It is not crap, but it is not quite there, IMHO.
It can be useful for certain jobs, I am sure, but it is not good as Oktava's
Soviet era ribbon mics.
It is really a first impression.
I can change my opinion when I have more experience with more units, try
some in a real world test.
So far, I didn't have an opportunity even to have one graphed in a anechoic
chamber.
--
Michael Vladimirsky
The Online Muzeum of Russian Microphones
www.microphones.ru
Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:9rkff7$j8o$1...@panix3.panix.com...