Is stepping up from an inexpensive mic worth it? You be the judge.


The U195 track plays first and the At3035 plays second (for real this time lol). The file is a 320 mp3; I could also provide a 15 mb wav if you guys want (I do think the mp3 compression masks some subtleties).


Chain was mic-> clean Sytek-> RME ADI-8DS ad/da at 24/96-> Alesis HD24->A&H GL330 console-> RME ADI-2 ad at 44.1-> HHB CDR830+ record transport. Then I dumped the files in Logic, normalized em, mp3-ified em and sent them off to your lovely ears.

Much thanks to my old friend Tuesday Parker for lending her voice (after a cup of coffee and a couple cigs...lol). Mics were recorded simultaneously, of course.

Man, I think they are real close. The esses are very sharp on both both mics. I liked that one, then that one, even toggled the middle of both of them back and forth, over and over, bout 10 times....... is investment difference worth it? Haelz no!!!

The siblance essyness in a mix would probably not show up, in fact would probably help!

Nice singer vinylman, good A/B!

They are close. I wanted to pull the files off digitally from the HD24 because the analog console smooths things over a bit; however, Alesis FST seems to have just up and stopped working--I think the OSX version is buggy. So I'll try again and maybe see if posting that way shows any more differences...but generally yes, I think either mic would be serviceable in a mix with the U195 being a bit sexier and smoother over all. It's subtle though, disturbingly subtle.

GAWD DIRTY!!! Dont take them apart man, you might find the same thing!!!!

I would say I hear a big diference in the mid range. I think the AT 3035 is much more musical.

Yep. Just listened again: the 3035 sounds much better. Sibilance is high on both, but a little less on the 3035.

Different strokes...the AT sounded cheap fake and grainy in comparison to my ears. While the differnece didn't stand out on Dirty's speaking voice...the difference is apparent here to me.

Subtle? I don't know...this is all a game of inches I think. Which inch is most important to you and how much can you justify spending? That's the only question. I mean...the high quality mic is subtle...the converters...the preamps...the acoustics...the compressor...the EQ...the reverb tail...

In the end, each piece may be subtle...the end result of all of the above is not.

I admit I get frustrated with these A/Bs because by the time they get posted here there's too many variables imo. Listening the un-mp3ified, straight outta the recorder tracks here on great monitors, the differences are not as subtle; both are sibilant, with the 3035 being more smeared to my ears. I agree the biggest dif is in the midrange; although on a male voice, I feel there are some notable differences in the low/lo-mid-end; AT calls it "warmth," I call it "masking a mediocre midrage" but hey, to each his own. I agree the 3035 is grainier on my voice. The AT was kinder to Tuesday than I had expected. In the time I have used the AT, I have found it to have a bit of a "metallic" sound which is noticeable mostly in the mid/upper mid.

Again, if anyone really wants I can provide these in .wav too, about a 15 mb DL.


OH, and I do I think the 3035 is a decent mic for $200 or less? Yeah. The problem is, the average person who is going to use this mic prolly isn't going to be using a Sytek or better and prolly isn't going to mix on an analog console. This is hwere it gets a bit hairy. You have a much better chance of that with the U195.

Pop makes a very good point about the mix--I am tending to agree that this is where good mic choice stands out, I'm interested to see how I feel once my mic cabinet expands more.

quote:

Subtle? I don't know...this is all a game of inches I think. Which inch is most....

I think its a game in millimeters, IMO.........inches seem to be too big of a measurement.

Comparing microphones with a voice recording is hard. Sometimes the cheap and inferior microphone wins, because it is the best match for the voice. I don't like the U195 for it's sibilant character on that voice, but I agree with POPMANN the AT sounds cheap and grainy. IMHO the best way to compare mic's is with a steel-string recording, the flaws stand out much more, even on mp3.
BTW. we all use different mp3 decoders/players and they all sound different, more or less.

quote:

the best way to compare mic's is with a steel-string recording, the flaws stand out much more, even on mp3.

As a clinical generalization, I'd agree...but the problem is folks looking for a vocal mic need to find the best matching "qualities" WITH the best quality.

Yep POP
That was what I was trying to say

For me #1 has a bit more high end definition, and a richer low midrange. They did sound similar though. Maybe it's the cool voice. Hey Tuesday, want to drop by on Saturday?

i am surprised the AT dose as well as it dose.
the AT is somewhat lacking.
thanks for the post.

No offense, fellas, but sometimes I wonder if recording engineers can really hear at all.

The modern day engineer is really a computer geek in disguise.

I'm not comment on comparisons other than neither mic works for her, at least as they are employed this time.

Dirty, was she singing straight forwards into the mics? My guess is yes. You need to turn them slightly to elimintae some of the spit and essiness. I also think this is a situation that screams fat switch on the U195. Oh, how far away from the mics was she? Sounds like she wasn't up close on them, another things I'd suggest....but you'd really have to work the position even more (which would take all of a minute).

This time the results were closer than on your voice. Again, I didn't like either. Too bad, Tuesday has a cute, sweat-sexy kinda voice and vibe.

Dirty, comparisons are difficult. When you don't compare using more than one mic at the same time, there are obvious performance differences.
But when you do, it usually winds up not getting the optimal placement for any of the mics. Slight changes in position and distance can make huge differences.

Not that you owe it to anyone but I'd be very interested in hearing with Tuesday's voice:
U195 turned slightly and up close....real close for intimacy.
U195 turned slightly with the fat switch engaged.
AT3035 worked as much as possible, which I would say is singing almost all of the way into the side and up close.

You might get some interesting results and if nothing else would be getting closer to optimal results.

Is stepping up from an inexpensive mic worth it?

Not when it's not the right mic!

Neither mic sounds good on her - at least with those positions and signal chain. She's got really strong S's. I'd back her up off the mic and put the mic diaphragm above her head.

And also, the Sytek's just not doing much for the sound of either of those mics on that application.

Pencil trick http://www.olscratchrecordings.com/home_recording_tips.htm

For her voice and that style of singing she's a perfect candidate for a ribbon mic. Coles 4038, AEA R84 or a Crowley & Tripp Studio Vocalist would do her right and make a mega difference.

Dot, I am going to redo this test at some point and pull this one. The results as far as I'm concerned are "inconclusive" because what you guys are hearing downloading these does not equal what came off the board.


You're right though, a ribbon would probably sound great on her She is an old friend and we are planning on working together on a project hopefully sooner than later.

Also agree I need more preamp flavor, but things have been slow this summer so it's not a priority right now.


Thanks for the comments!

Sorry, but I hear a big difference. The 3035 sounded good (any mic would sound good on her voice - it's beautiful), but the Soundelux definitely gave her voice more body and vibrance.

yeah, I'm with JeffSanders on this one. The U195 is (IMO) much more defined in the high end and mids. the AT just sounds very "blah" to me. No life in it.

First I have to say that Tuesday's voice is beautiful. Second, neither microphone would be my choice for recording her.
Mic 1) The U195 captured more of the air around Tuesday's voice. The mids are more defined IMO.
The upper mids breathe a bit better.

Mic2)The AT3035 sounds grainy and lifeless to me.

I have to agree that a ribbon mic would most likey win a "shootout" on this source hands down.

Tuesday's voice has a sexy, "breathy" quality that neither of these two microphones do much to ephasize. Positioning may very well help this
but, IMO a ribbon microphone would emphasize the qualities that everyone has mentioned about Tuesday's vocal tone. Her little giggle at the onset of these tracks was Very telling to my ears.