$50 mic vs $1000 mic: a FAIR comparison!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 січ 2017
- 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/mikedelgaudio
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.com/BoothJunkie
Links to amazon and kit.com may include affiliate codes in which I earn a small commission on products you purchase. . Thanks! - Навчання та стиль
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 can’t sing.”
Alcohol: trust me. You can do anything.
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
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.
I love reviews that are straight to the point, and very well presented. This was fantastic, thank you so much.
Just want to say I love your down to earth viewpoint. Keep up the good work!
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)
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).
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!! :)
Thank you! Great point! Focusing on the production aspects rather than the gear.
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.
Great job, loved your point. Tried it on 3 different devices and could not tell.
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. UA-cam 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 UA-cam 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
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!
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.
You are a voice over Jedi! loving all this great info!
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.
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. UA-cam 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 UA-cam 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
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.
Thank you for always going about your videos so "intelligently". Your "unpredictability" is so refreshing.
This is a very wise comparison video. Thank you for the insightful syntax, while comparing two very different price points.
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!!
Great video, even after all these years, still helpful. Your voice and presence are fantastic. Btw you remind me so much of Mark Hamill.
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
Haha I'm loving the side camera! lol
"Law of diminishing returns" - one and only answer to all mic comparisons
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.
Very true. Let's talk about preamps now.
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.
Brilliant piece . . . informative and entertaining. Thanks!
This video was great. You nailed it my man!
The noise level is better (quiet) in Neumann TLM 103. And TLM103 sounds a bit warmer with good bass relief on the voice.
Well put. Not too noticeable especially once in the mix. Thanks for your voice of reason.
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!
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.
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
This guys voice is so compelling. He could narrate Morgan Freeman's life story
thanks for that awesome comparison
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!???
Amazing video. thank you so much. that was so awesome. and almost no difference out of my phone speakers.
Know that was really fair. I honestly could not tell. Thank you very much.
BWUAHAHAHA! Thanks for cracking me up!!! :D Bought the mic years ago and glad to see I can put it to good use! I do occasional gigs for a studio and trying to get this up and running for myself. Stumbled upon you and LOVE your vids! Thanks!!
Thanks!!! This was helpful.
excellent video and super helpful. what mic would you recommend to a person who is just starting and is on the budget?
Great work champ - thanks so much! I'd kill for a Neauman u87 though :-)
Love your videos dude! I just wonder if you could review and test the sE
X1 xlr mic, because you are the only damn person who can properly use
these types of microphones! I've been looking around on UA-cam but only
bad reviews on that mic and noone knows how to set it up for good
quality sound! Thanks
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!
I have to admit it again ... I really love this guy ! I mean the information he delivers.
Great channel. Love the name. I wish you continued success.
great Vid!! I recorded a few songs with the Neumann and its really good and clear:)
Hi Mike. I'm looking to upgrade my mic locker and wonder, were you me and had to make a choice, whether you'd be inclined to buy the Sennheiser MKH 416 or the Neumann T103. My focus is long-form narration and I already have noob favorite Rode NT1-A as well as the Shure SM7B (which I love for audiobooks due to its off-axis noise rejection, works great in my less than perfect recording environment). I'm adding more acoustic treatment to the studio (bass traps and Corning 703 sound panels) this week and expect the doing so will better accommodate the pickup pattern/sensitivity of both these upgraded mic options.
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! 👍🏼
great video. this should be very educational to beginners and pros alike😊
When it gets brighter, it's the Neumann.
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
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
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
Good job keeping me engaged
you have a beautiful voice! a real radio voice!
I also think well for broadcasting weather reports :-)
friendly greetings from The Netherlands
Rob.
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.
Good point of view! Great video!
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.
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.
Great video, would you be able to do a video about USB microphones? I know they are typically frowned upon but I've heard good things about the Apogee 96k Mic and the Blue Yeti Pro that records up to 196k and in addition to USB it has XLR connections.
Bryan Olson you just plug them into an audio recorder then your set
Jus subbed. Great content
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...
For everyone saying they hear little to no difference:
Keep in mind that UA-cam'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. UA-cam 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 "UA-cam 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 UA-cam itself.
@@MaxLohMusic You're a fool if you think UA-cam 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 UA-cam, it's a total myth. UA-cam 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 UA-cam 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 UA-cam audio compression complaint is a relic of the past where they did very audibly compress sound to an mp3-like quality.
amazing job you did
helps people understand the affordable one is the suitable one
Very cleverly done. You dont realize what the point is until you do.
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.
Great job!
Excellent point. Never sacrifice good enough in the look for excellent.
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).
your explanation of the law of diminishing returns made me tear up
Hey Mike,
How does one learn to hear the difference between a $50 and a $1000 mic? I just watched and listened but couldn't discern when the shifts were happening. I tried listening with my studio monitors, I tried with some Sennheiser headphones, and I couldn't pick up on any of the switches.
Actually, I think I might be able to hear the difference now, but in order to hear it, but the irony is that I had to use a terrible pair of headphones to hear it. And even then it's not an easy task for my ears.
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.
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 UA-cam 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.
couldn’t tell on my older iphone but it’s curious too how you favored using the TLM more often..
Can you tell me where you got your shock mount for the AKG,,,please. great review by the way.
Your voice is fantastic. I'm subscribing just for that
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.
Great video. loved you in star wars btw
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'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
Alan , is that you?? hahaha nice video dude
Thanks for the video. Is there any way you can post uncompressed files of each mic? I think UA-cam compression hides a lot of the differences.
Due to cost concerns, I've been using AKG Perception 400 microphones on multiple application, usually for live recording. The best example I have for voice is a radio play we did a few years ago, soundcloud.com/mdatcher/sstg-war-of-the-worlds . Keep in mind that there was an audience and therefore a lot of background noise. Until I can earn more money in audio work, I think they are going to get a lot more use until I upgrade to something better.
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.
What sample rate and bit rate was the audio recorded and uploaded at? I couldn't tell a difference honestly on a $1000+ speaker or headphone setup.
When the part is lighter with light backround it means it's working, or the part with black backroung is the one working?
Because the first seconds are not better than the seconds arround 0:50, which would mean AKG is better? I'm amazed i own an AKG 200 and didn't know was that good.
i love his videos
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 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.
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.
Great video! The most important thing I took with me is your fantastic demonstartion of the law of diminishing returns on that example with mics. Very helpful to overcome G.A.S. if you ask me! It really comes down to this question: does the outcome justify the investment? I mean, it is so easy to get obsessed with gear - that a certain improvment makes all the difference between amateur and pro, which in the end could make that tiny difference between oblivion and sucess... I think I am going to rewatch this every 6 months or so to keep me reminded.
Which one is the bassier one that really pumps up the loews again? And where in the video is it even mentioned which one is which? Been rewatching parts and can't find a single moment. Please do tell. Very much a beginner here, sorry for the trouble.
I'm seeing alot of people who "can hear the difference".
No you can't. Not with how UA-cam compresses the audio.
This opens my eyes again, thanks!
And....
My ears.
What if they arent
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.
I know this is an old video but it's interesting to me. But I can't figure out how we're supposed to know which mic we're listening to, did I miss something? Thanks!