KM184 vs. SM81 for acoustic guitar steel string and nylon
Equus
I read a post here a while ago that the Sure SM81s sounded just as
good if not better than the Neumann KM 184s for acoustic guitar. My
application will be for both steel string and nylon string. Is the
extra money for the 184s really worth it? Thanks for all replies...
JM
F.
try an AT4051 also...
F.
Make It Work Productions
----------
In article <6ekbuo$3...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, eq...@ix.netcom.com
Scott Dorsey
In article <6ekbuo$3...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> eq...@ix.netcom.com (Equus) writes:
>I read a post here a while ago that the Sure SM81s sounded just as
>good if not better than the Neumann KM 184s for acoustic guitar. My
>application will be for both steel string and nylon string. Is the
>extra money for the 184s really worth it? Thanks for all replies...
The 184 will definitely be more detailed and have a lower noise floor,
but they both have a similar pitched-up sort of sound character. Try
them and decide for yourself.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Jim Bickerstaff
I fully agree to try AT 4050 on acoustic instruments. I have found that I
like the 4050 a bit farther away than either the 184s or the 81 to cut
down on "boomyness." I personally prefer the 184s (by far) to the 81s in
most any application but especially the acoustic string instruments. I
would hate to live without my 184s and (IMHO) the cost of 184s is nothing
compared to what they can do. Buy 'em!
Jim Bickerstaff
Gravity 783
> try an AT4051 also...
ark
>I fully agree to try AT 4050 on acoustic instruments.
I tried recording some of my older Martins with an AT4050 & hated it.
Muddy, no sparkle... that mic was not designed for this application.
Sound great micing guitar amps though...
Al
"There's no money in poetry, but then
there's no poetry in money, either."
-- Robert Graves
Please remove "NOSPAM" from the header to reply to a...@aa.net
RDyer14145
Just my 2 cents worth but I bought a 184 just for acoustic guitar. I liked it
but finally I got my hands on a couple of km84's and I find them much better.
When I recorded my Matrin HD28, Larrivee' CO9 and 612C Taylor in stereo I used
a TLM193 and at first the km184 and later the km 84 and was more than pleased.
I carry the 84's with me for live micing.
R.D.
Ty Ford
In Article <35226b14...@news.aa.net>, a...@aa.net (ark) wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Mar 1998 11:09:53 -0600, Jim Bickerstaff
><jbs...@companet.net> wrote:
>
>>I fully agree to try AT 4050 on acoustic instruments.
>
>I tried recording some of my older Martins with an AT4050 & hated it.
>Muddy, no sparkle... that mic was not designed for this application.
>Sound great micing guitar amps though...
>
>Al
>
>I have found that I
>>like the 4050 a bit farther away than either the 184s or the 81 to cut
>>down on "boomyness." I personally prefer the 184s (by far) to the 81s in
>>most any application but especially the acoustic string instruments. I
>>would hate to live without my 184s and (IMHO) the cost of 184s is nothing
>>compared to what they can do. Buy 'em!
>>
>>Jim Bickerstaff
>>Gravity 783
>>
>>> try an AT4051 also...
>>
>>> Sure SM81s sounded just as
>>> >good if not better than the Neumann KM 184s for acoustic guitar. My
>>> >application will be for both steel string and nylon string. Is the
Hi,
Using the omni pattern and placing the 4050 a lot closer that you thought
possible (like 2-3 inches from the sound hole) works for my D28S. The
cardioid pattern's proximity effect and the D28 E and A string are
gauaranteed to give you a muddy sound.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty's commercial and narration demos are available at www.jaguNET.com/~tford. He
has also just uploaded an upgraded list of production music and SFX library
companies.
THarper48
Try a coles 4038 or any decent ribbon mic with a sm57 or an U87 placed
somewhere to get the transients. I bet you'll like it.
Tim
Jeff Olsen
>like the 4050 a bit farther away than either the 184s or the 81 to cut
>down on "boomyness." I personally prefer the 184s (by far) to the 81s in
>most any application but especially the acoustic string instruments. I
>would hate to live without my 184s and (IMHO) the cost of 184s is nothing
>compared to what they can do. Buy 'em!
I agree that 184's are nice mics. I also really like AKG 460's on
acoustic stringed instruments, especially if they have to sit in a mix.
The bass rolloff and zingier but still nice top end sort of take care of
two things I'd end up adding (or subtracting) if I used a 184...
However, if the person playing the instrument is singing at the same
time, I like the off-axis response of the 184 a lot better than the 460.
The 460 is a strange beastie off axis...
If realism isn't really the goal but beauty and lushness is, my
Soundelux U95 has served me well on this front a few times...
-jeff
Scott Dorsey
In article <6f85ub$9...@garcia.efn.org> je...@efn.org (Jeff Olsen) writes:
>
>However, if the person playing the instrument is singing at the same
>time, I like the off-axis response of the 184 a lot better than the 460.
>The 460 is a strange beastie off axis...
Has anyone tried the 480? Yeah, I know the capsule is the same, but I had
some hopes of it being less gritty on the top end than the 460.
Dave Martin
Scott Dorsey wrote in message ...
>Has anyone tried the 480? Yeah, I know the capsule is the same, but I had
>some hopes of it being less gritty on the top end than the 460.
>--scott
This afternoon, I'll compare a 460 and a 480 on acoustic guitar. Maybe I'll
be able to answer that tomorrow.
Dave Martin
Digital Media Associates
Nashville, Tennessee
dave....@nashville.com
Dave Martin
Dave Martin wrote in message <6f8scj$dtq$2...@usenet47.supernews.com>...
>Scott Dorsey wrote in message ...
>>In article <6f85ub$9...@garcia.efn.org> je...@efn.org (Jeff Olsen) writes:
>
>
>>Has anyone tried the 480? Yeah, I know the capsule is the same, but I had
>>some hopes of it being less gritty on the top end than the 460.
>>--scott
>
>This afternoon, I'll compare a 460 and a 480 on acoustic guitar. Maybe I'll
>be able to answer that tomorrow.
>
I e-mailed Scott, but if anyone wants to know, the 480 is a smoother mic
than the 460.
mg...@earthlink.net
> I read a post here a while ago that the Sure SM81s sounded just as
> good if not better than the Neumann KM 184s for acoustic guitar. My
> application will be for both steel string and nylon string. Is the
> extra money for the 184s really worth it? Thanks for all replies...
>
> JM
I think the KM54 is the choice for acoustic guitar. But these days that's
lots of extra bucks. Even used it once on unamplified hollowbody electric
(on "No One Said It Would Be Easy" from "Tuesday Night Music Club.") Great
mic but physically a little delicate - .6 micron nickel capsule.
Jeff Olsen
>In article <6f85ub$9...@garcia.efn.org> je...@efn.org (Jeff Olsen) writes:
>>
>>However, if the person playing the instrument is singing at the same
>>time, I like the off-axis response of the 184 a lot better than the 460.
>>The 460 is a strange beastie off axis...
>Has anyone tried the 480? Yeah, I know the capsule is the same, but I had
>some hopes of it being less gritty on the top end than the 460.
>--scott
The only review I've seen of it was by Micheal Cooper, who is a huge fan
of the 460. He's never had anything bad to say about the 460, though, so
maybe he doesn't hear the things in their sound that you don't like... as
I recall, he heard the 480 as being faster, and more open. He said they
rivalled things like B&K and Scheopps. I know the skepticism meter is in
danger of damaging it action here <g>!
For that matter, though, I don't really hear the 460 as gritty... the top
end has a crystalline (in both a good and bad way, am I allowed to say
that?) quality to it, and they certainly aren't particularly transparent
up there, but gritty isn't a word I'd use. I've also heard them
described by scott as "spitty" on the top and at high SPL's; I've used
them on drum overheads and not heard that either; although there's a
"glare" on things like cymbals I don't hear with the 184.
But I've not used anything better than a KM184. So maybe I'm surrounded
in grit and spit and don't even know it <g>!
-jeff
RDyer14145
>But I've not used anything better than a KM184.
I have a km184 which I bought and used for acoustic guitar primarily. However I
was able to aquire a couple of km84's and find them considerably better for
acoustic guitar.
R.D.
Fletcher
In <199803271540...@ladder01.news.aol.com> rdyer...@aol.com
I have all of the above and have found the Wright Omni to bury them
both in terms of clarity and ability to capture the tone of the
instrument...especially on nylon string instruments.
--
Fletcher
Mercenary Audio
http://www.mercenary.com