[adam79]

I was talking with someone at a store that rents mics. I asked to rent a
RE20 for tracking a kick drum. He said that older mics, like the RE20,
and others (421s, etc) were made to work with the older analog boards
that had transformers in the mic pres. He went on to say that these mics
don't work well with mic-pres that don't have transformers (which my
MBox2 would fall under). He said alot of stuff in a short period of
time; he was kinda loopy. But one thing that stuck out was his comment
about how the new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications
will outperform U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're
connected to the most quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to
make of this guy's "recording tips."

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted
to run it by you guys and see your comments.

-Adam

[Mike Rivers]

adam79 wrote:

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted
to run it by you guys and see your comments.

There are no fair generalizations. If you want a mic to
record a kick drum, tell him to give you an RE-20,
gawddamit! You'll like it. You won't ever know how it sounds
with a preamp that has an input transformer because you
don't have one.

It's true that the newer Chinese mics do tend to get
selected for specific purposes, but mostly that's because
the cheapest ones have some sort of frequency response or
pattern irregularity that makes them less worse for
particular sources. That's part of what makes them cheap.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[PStamler]

On Aug 16, 7:08*pm, adam79 wrote:
I was talking with someone at a store that rents mics. I asked to rent a
RE20 for tracking a kick drum. He said that older mics, like the RE20,
and others (421s, etc) were made to work with the older analog boards
that had transformers in the mic pres. He went on to say that these mics
don't work well with mic-pres that don't have transformers (which my
MBox2 would fall under). He said alot of stuff in a short period of
time; he was kinda loopy. But one thing that stuck out was his comment
about how the new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications
will outperform U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're
connected to the most quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to
make of this guy's "recording tips."

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted
to run it by you guys and see your comments.

To quote my late mother, if BS was electricity this guy would be a
powerhouse.

It's true that some dynamic mics are quite sensitive to loading, the
SM57 family being the prime example. However, the RE20 and MD421
aren't; they'll sound about the same into just about any load you hang
on them.

As for Chinese mics designed for specific apps outperforming U
47s...naah, not usually. There are a few very good Chinese mics out
there, but the U 47 is in a different class.

Peace,
Paul

[RD Jones]

On Aug 16, 7:08*pm, adam79 wrote:
I was talking with someone at a store that rents mics. I asked to rent a
RE20 for tracking a kick drum. He said that older mics, like the RE20,
and others (421s, etc) were made to work with the older analog boards
that had transformers in the mic pres. He went on to say that these mics
don't work well with mic-pres that don't have transformers (which my
MBox2 would fall under). He said alot of stuff in a short period of
time; he was kinda loopy. But one thing that stuck out was his comment
about how the new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications
will outperform U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're
connected to the most quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to
make of this guy's "recording tips."

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted
to run it by you guys and see your comments.

I suspect he rents (and/or sells) mic preamps with transformers.

It's well known that the lowly SM57 can be made to sound quite
a bit better by proper loading, either resistively, or with a
transformer.
The reason is that the '57 has it's own transformer inside that's
intended to work into another at the other end of the line.
The RE20 also has a transformer, but it's somewhat less picky
about loading.

rd

[alex]

Il 17/08/2010 2.08, adam79 ha scritto:
new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications will outperform
U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're connected to the
most quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to make of this
guy's "recording tips."
once i tested a chinese mic that was aestetically VERY similar to the
u87. It doesn't sound "bad", but was impossible to do a good quality
comparision because the real BIG difference was the output level. The
u87 has about 20dB more of output than those "copies". So for that
chinese mic i tested you need a much cleaner (good) preamplifier as for
the real u87, because you have tou "push it up" much more.
So the u87 can work well with a cheap preamp, this "chinese" not.
The RE20 (once PL20) has been used for years on every type of pres with
wonderful results.

alex

[Mike Rivers]

alex wrote:

once i tested a chinese mic that was aestetically VERY similar to the
u87. It doesn't sound "bad", but was impossible to do a good quality
comparision because the real BIG difference was the output level. The
u87 has about 20dB more of output than those "copies".

This is a product of the huge number of inexperienced people
recording (and some that design audio equipment, too) today.
Before the day of the cheap condenser mic, those who sprung
for a "pro" condenser mic complained about how "hot" it was
compared to the dynamic PA mics they've been using with
their PortaStudios. The mic industry happily complied with
mics that had lower output level for a given SPL to match
the new gear that didn't have an input pad.

By the way, an RE20 is a relatively insensitive mic, perhaps
as much as 6 dB less output than an SM57 on the same source.
So if low output bothers you, you may not be happy in
general with an RE20 (though it's a great mic for vocals,
acoustic guitars, and brass) but you won't have any trouble
with it on a kick drum.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[Scott Dorsey]

adam79 wrote:
I was talking with someone at a store that rents mics. I asked to rent a
RE20 for tracking a kick drum. He said that older mics, like the RE20,
and others (421s, etc) were made to work with the older analog boards
that had transformers in the mic pres. He went on to say that these mics
don't work well with mic-pres that don't have transformers (which my
MBox2 would fall under). He said alot of stuff in a short period of
time; he was kinda loopy. But one thing that stuck out was his comment
about how the new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications
will outperform U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're
connected to the most quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to
make of this guy's "recording tips."

A lot of microphones are sensitive to loading and benefit from either a
transformer input or a shunt resistor so that they see a 600 ohm load.
This includes the SM-57 and SM-58.

It does not include the RE-20, which is remarkably insensitive to loading.
I don't think it includes the 421.

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted
to run it by you guys and see your comments.

The difference between the SM-57 unloaded and with a 600 ohm load is like
night and day.

On the OTHER hand, most ribbon mikes perform better with a high-Z load
and tend to work better into a modern transformerless input.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[slinkp]

On Aug 17, 8:31*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The difference between the SM-57 unloaded and with a 600 ohm load is like
night and day.

I've run into this comment a few times now, and I'm curious.
What specifically is affected by the loading? Frequency response?
Distortion? Something else?

- PW

[Scott Dorsey]

slinkp wrote:
On Aug 17, 8:31=A0am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The difference between the SM-57 unloaded and with a 600 ohm load is like
night and day.

I've run into this comment a few times now, and I'm curious.
What specifically is affected by the loading? Frequency response?
Distortion? Something else?

Both. The SM-57, like a lot of tightly-coupled high-efficiency dynamic
designs, relies on the load impedance to provide some of the damping for
the diaphragm. Without a load, the diaphragm bounces back and forth;
the resonant point of the system moves up, you get at least one additional
resonance, and the linearity is much poorer.

Stick a 600 ohm resistor into a barrel connector between pins 2 and 3, or
modify a cable. Cost you a couple bucks, and the improvement in sound
quality on a cheap console is phenomenal.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:08:04 -0400, adam79 wrote
(in article ):

the new Chinese mics that are made for specific applications will outperform
U-47s (and mics of those caliber), even when they're connected to the most
quality Neve consoles. I really don't know what to make of this guy's
"recording tips."

That may be true if you're selling new chinese mics. Professionally, I've
found the great majority of the chinese mics have been made in ignorance of
how to make a mic without an irritating peak somewhere between 5k and 11 k.

The comment he made about certain older mics not working to their full
potential without mic pres w/ transformers caught my interest; I wanted to
run it by you guys and see your comments.

I don't think you can make a global statement about all older mics. Older
mics with transformers versus older mics without transformers, versus older
mics that happen to have a 600 Ohm output impedance, versus older mics with
higher impedances, versus.....etc.

I do know from experience that some old and new mics like a transformer or a
transformer-like input. The AKG C414 (most of the 5 or so different versions)
and the TLM 103, for example, like old Neve preamps but they also do very
well into a GML, which is transformerless.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[adam79]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Stick a 600 ohm resistor into a barrel connector between pins 2 and 3, or
modify a cable. Cost you a couple bucks, and the improvement in sound
quality on a cheap console is phenomenal.
--scott

Is there any kind of diagram on the web (that you could link me to) that
shows you how to do this in more detail? Are there adapters available
(for this purpose) that you can attach to the mic cable connector? Also,
I was looking up 600ohm resistors, and they come in different watts; how
many watts should the resistor be?

Thanks,
-Adam

[Scott Dorsey]

adam79 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

Stick a 600 ohm resistor into a barrel connector between pins 2 and 3, or
modify a cable. Cost you a couple bucks, and the improvement in sound
quality on a cheap console is phenomenal.

Is there any kind of diagram on the web (that you could link me to) that
shows you how to do this in more detail?

Probably not, but there is an article in Recording by Paul Stamler that
details it. It's not anything difficult, it's just a single resistor
between pins 2 and 3 of a cable or a straight-through barrel, so the
resistor is in parallel with the mike transformer output.

Are there adapters available
(for this purpose) that you can attach to the mic cable connector?

You can get a barrel connector that has a male on one and and a female
on the other. Markertek (or any other pro audio dealer) will stock them.
I don't remember the Switchcraft part number offhand.

Or you can use a cable, just make sure to mark it.


Also,
I was looking up 600ohm resistors, and they come in different watts; how
many watts should the resistor be?

A 1/4 watt one is fine. 620 or 680 ohms are fine too, just needs to be
in the ballpark.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

adam79 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

Stick a 600 ohm resistor into a barrel connector between pins 2 and 3, or
modify a cable.

Is there any kind of diagram on the web (that you could link me to) that
shows you how to do this in more detail?

There are two pins. If you look closely at the XLR
connector, you'll see a 1, 2, and a 3 which will tell you
which pins are which. The resistor has two leads. How hard
is that to figure out? Do you really need a diagram?

Are there adapters available
(for this purpose) that you can attach to the mic cable connector?

Unfortunately not off the shelf. There are people who will
make one for you however.

I was looking up 600ohm resistors, and they come in different watts; how
many watts should the resistor be?

1/4 watt is fine. Good question, though.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[Agent 86]

He's a dumbass. Run, don't walk.

[[email protected]]

On 2010-08-17 said:
He's a dumbass. Run, don't walk.

I'm with him Adam. Run as far away from the idiot at the
store as you can get when it comes to getting advice.
TOtally and utterly clueless.

hE's trying to sell you something else, and has
misinterpreted some talk he heard elsewhere, in order to do
it.

Be very scared if you follow advice from this guy.

Regards,





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message

On 2010-08-17 said:
He's a dumbass. Run, don't walk.

I'm with him Adam. Run as far away from the idiot at the
store as you can get when it comes to getting advice.
TOtally and utterly clueless.

hE's trying to sell you something else, and has
misinterpreted some talk he heard elsewhere, in order to
do it.

Be very scared if you follow advice from this guy.

Agreed.

[adam79]

Arny Krueger wrote:
He's a dumbass. Run, don't walk.

I'm with him Adam. Run as far away from the idiot at the
store as you can get when it comes to getting advice.
TOtally and utterly clueless.

hE's trying to sell you something else, and has
misinterpreted some talk he heard elsewhere, in order to
do it.

Be very scared if you follow advice from this guy.

Agreed.



Ok, cool.. I'm not the only one who thinks this guy is out of his mind!
Unfortunately, I still have to deal with him; he's the only local guy
that rents mics. I really want to rent the RE20, so I can use it for the
kick drum, and also experiment with it (I plan to buy it when I get the
cash). Although, he did say that he might not have a RE20 to lend. If
so, what would be a good next choice? I've never had a chance to
hear/play around with a 421.. would work well? Or should I just got for
an Audix D-6 or one of those frequency specific mics?

If my home studio project starts to get some clients, it'll probably be
mostly local punk/hardcore. Maybe this will help explain my mic choice.
I do, however, want to make sure that if the studio grows I have a
versatile kick mic that's good for more than one or two sounds.

Thanks,
-Adam

[adam79]

mcnews wrote:

http://www.recordingmag.com/resource...etail/330.html

So you attach the resistor right on the pins? How does it connect to the
female connector with the resistor in the way?

Thanks,
-Adam

[Mike Rivers]

adam79 wrote:

Ok, cool.. I'm not the only one who thinks this guy is out of his mind!
Unfortunately, I still have to deal with him; he's the only local guy
that rents mics. I really want to rent the RE20, so I can use it for the
kick drum, and also experiment with it (I plan to buy it when I get the
cash). Although, he did say that he might not have a RE20 to lend.

That could explain why he was more enthusiastic about
renting you something else. Most rental companies do rentals
by mail so if you don't have a good local rental house, you
can go elsewhere. You don't want to pay shipping on a 400
pound 24-track analog recorder for a day just to try it, but
shipping a mic is fairly cheap. A few reliable ones (all
have RE-20s, about $20/day) a

http://www.audiorents.com/
http://www.dreamhire.com/
http://www.dfxaudio.com/

what would be a good next choice? I've never had a chance to
hear/play around with a 421.. would work well?

For kick drum? Sure.




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[Mike Rivers]

adam79 wrote:

http://www.recordingmag.com/resource...etail/330.html

So you attach the resistor right on the pins? How does it connect to the
female connector with the resistor in the way?

Oy! You take the connector apart and install the resistor
on the inside of the shell. To be precise, you're connecting
to the back end of the pin, not the part that mates with the
other connector. If you can't figure out how to disassemble
an XLR connector, you'd best get someone local to show you.
There are a number of different designs.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[[email protected]]

ADam writes:
Be very scared if you follow advice from this guy.
Agreed.
Ok, cool.. I'm not the only one who thinks this guy is out of his
mind! Unfortunately, I still have to deal with him; he's the only
local guy that rents mics. I really want to rent the RE20, so I can
use it for the kick drum, and also experiment with it (I plan to
buy it when I get the cash). Although, he did say that he might not
have a RE20 to lend. If so, what would be a good next choice? I've
never had a chance to hear/play around with a 421.. would work
well? Or should I just got for an Audix D-6 or one of those
frequency specific mics?

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

If my home studio project starts to get some clients, it'll
probably be mostly local punk/hardcore. Maybe this will help
explain my mic choice. I do, however, want to make sure that if the
studio grows I have a versatile kick mic that's good for more than
one or two sounds.
That's why I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...






Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , wrote:

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

You CAN go wrong with one, by getting the 421 Mk II which is not actually
a 421 at all and really is a different microphone designed to look like a
421. Stay away from that.

But the real original 421 is a good mike on just about everything. And the
441 is just as good!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[alex]

On 20/08/2010 15:12, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In ,0junk4me@ bellsouth.net wrote:

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

You CAN go wrong with one, by getting the 421 Mk II which is not actually
a 421 at all and really is a different microphone designed to look like a
421. Stay away from that.

But the real original 421 is a good mike on just about everything. And the
441 is just as good!
--scott
never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

[adam79]

That's what I figured; my last post was stupid. Thanks to all for your
patience w/ me.

-Adam

On 8/20/10 6:36 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
adam79 wrote:

http://www.recordingmag.com/resource...etail/330.html

So you attach the resistor right on the pins? How does it connect to
the female connector with the resistor in the way?

Oy! You take the connector apart and install the resistor on the inside
of the shell. To be precise, you're connecting to the back end of the
pin, not the part that mates with the other connector. If you can't
figure out how to disassemble an XLR connector, you'd best get someone
local to show you. There are a number of different designs.

[Mike Rivers]

alex wrote:

never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

No, the one that's currently sold as the 421-II
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/profess...ng-film_000984

Dunno the 521. Can't find it in the current on-line US
catalog or an older paper catalog that I have here.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

[[email protected]]

On 2010-08-20 (ScottDorsey) said:
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.
You CAN go wrong with one, by getting the 421 Mk II which is not
actually a 421 at all and really is a different microphone designed
to look like a 421. Stay away from that.
But the real original 421 is a good mike on just about everything.
And the 441 is just as good!
YEp, make sure it's the older one, should've reminded him of
that as he's obviously a newbie and hasn't seen past
discussions here and elsewhere on the topic.





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Scott Dorsey]

alex wrote:
never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

Nope.

http://www.sennheiser.com/sennheiser...amic-MD-421-II

At least they haven't wrecked the 441 yet.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Preben Friis]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...

Dunno the 521. Can't find it in the current on-line US catalog or an older
paper catalog that I have here.

The 521 was part of the "Black Fire" series together with 531, 541, 509 etc.
Being from the 80'ies I think the 521 has the same capsule as the 421-II,
but mine is not very different from the old gray 421s. The polar plot in the
Black Fire catalog looks a bit different than the 421-II plot on the current
web site, but that might just be differences in marketing...

/Preben Friis

[Scott Dorsey]

Preben Friis wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...

Dunno the 521. Can't find it in the current on-line US catalog or an older
paper catalog that I have here.

The 521 was part of the "Black Fire" series together with 531, 541, 509 etc.
Being from the 80'ies I think the 521 has the same capsule as the 421-II,
but mine is not very different from the old gray 421s. The polar plot in the
Black Fire catalog looks a bit different than the 421-II plot on the current
web site, but that might just be differences in marketing...

I don't know, but I _do_ know that the 431 that was was rebadged as a 531
for the Black Fire series seems to be identical. I have a couple of those
and wish I had more.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[alex]

On 20/08/2010 18:23, Mike Rivers wrote:
alex wrote:

never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

No, the one that's currently sold as the 421-II
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/profess...ng-film_000984


Dunno the 521. Can't find it in the current on-line US catalog or an
older paper catalog that I have here.


Sennheiser sold it in the mid '90s. I saw it in some drum kit bundles
along with some e604, where the 521 was supposed to be the bass drum mic.

http://www.sennheiser.com/sennheiser/old_manual.nsf/resources/BF_521_2.pdf/$File/BF_521_2.pdf

[alex]

On 20/08/2010 18:23, Mike Rivers wrote:
alex wrote:

never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

No, the one that's currently sold as the 421-II
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/profess...ng-film_000984


Dunno the 521. Can't find it in the current on-line US catalog or an
older paper catalog that I have here.


Sennheiser sold it in the mid '90s. I saw it in some drum kit bundles
along with some e604, where the 521 was supposed to be the bass drum mic.

http://www.sennheiser.com/sennheiser/old_manual.nsf/resources/BF_521_2.pdf/$File/BF_521_2.pdf

[geoff]

adam79 wrote:
That's what I figured; my last post was stupid. Thanks to all for your
patience w/ me.

I thought you were jesting ;-)

The XLRM-XLRF 'adaptors' are a good way to go. You can put a dymo label on
them to differentiate between the 'micloader' and your 'phase reverser'
adaptor. If you haven't done one of those, you may as well make a few at
the same time,. Simply swap wires between p2 and p3 on one (either
connector end). On the rear !


geoff

[geoff]

wrote:
?

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

If my home studio project starts to get some clients, it'll
probably be mostly local punk/hardcore. Maybe this will help
explain my mic choice. I do, however, want to make sure that if the
studio grows I have a versatile kick mic that's good for more than
one or two sounds.
That's why I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...

But very shreiky on guitar amps, I've found. And loading doesn't help,
where a '57 loaded properly and stuck in front of a gat amp 'grows balls'.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff wrote:
That's why I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...

But very shreiky on guitar amps, I've found. And loading doesn't help,
where a '57 loaded properly and stuck in front of a gat amp 'grows balls'.

That's good for clangy surf guitar. But if you don't like it, move it off
toward the edge of the cone and cock it outward a little bit.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:42:54 -0400, alex wrote
(in article ) :

On 20/08/2010 15:12, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In ,0junk4me@ bellsouth.net wrote:

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

You CAN go wrong with one, by getting the 421 Mk II which is not actually
a 421 at all and really is a different microphone designed to look like a
421. Stay away from that.

But the real original 421 is a good mike on just about everything. And the
441 is just as good!
--scott
never heard about this mk2, do you mean the 521 which is similar in
shape to the 421 but without the "Musik-Stimme" ring?

No. Sennheiser stopped making the 421 some years ago when the molds for the
body wore out. Why they didn't make new molds like the old ones I don't know,
but that's what they told me.

They revamped the capsule and when I first got it to review, I was mildly
disgusted by the nasty little peak the 421 II has. Wait, here's my review...

Regards,

Ty Ford



Sennheiser Retires The MD 421 -- Debuts the 421 II.
Ty Ford Baltimore, MD

The Sennheiser MD 421 is no longer being made. It has been replaced by the
MD 421 II at the same price, $485. There was no funeral. I missed the
announcement of the retirement ceremony. You can, none the less, mark it
on your calendar as a milestone event in professional audio. How do you
replace a mic as ubiquitous as the Sennheiser 421? I would imagine this
thought bounced around Sennheiser quite a bit before they actually made
the move. The short of it is that the 421 II is brighter, has a very
slightly extended low end response and is about half an inch shorter than the
original model.

According to SennheiserÕs Greg Beebe, the new 421 II coils are made of
lower mass aluminum rather than copper. Less mass results in better
transient response and increased high-frequency response. The new
version has wider resonator/diaphragm contact (about 3/4Ó versus 1/2Ó
on the original). That additional contact also results in an accentuation of
the high frequencies.

The new NeoDymium magnet was chosen for its tight
temperature coefficient, ensuring constant gauss (and operation) across a
wide range of ambient operating temperatures. The original version has a
wide humbucking coil, the new version is more narrow, but has more
strands and is a little taller. A lead slug is attached to the new capsule,
which, According to Beebe, adds mass and cuts down on handling noise. I'll
miss the silver embossed name across the front of the mic, but with the
two so similar in design, it will help you tell which is which quickly.

Although the published specifications of the two mics are virtually
identical, the individual frequency response charts tell a different story.
Whereas my original 421 is up 6dB from 1KHz to 4KHz, the 421 II is up
8dB. My original 421 was down 6dB at 50Hz, while the 421 II was down
only 4dB. My overall reaction in A/Bing the two is that, relative to the 421
II, the original 421 sounds like it has a blanket hung in front of it. The
change in frequency response also has an effect on the way the mic
handles the human voice. The original 421 seems darker and more focused
on sounds from the back of the throat, while the 421 II seems more suited
for sounds from the front of the mouth and from the facial mask. Like its
predecessor, the 421 II has the five-position roll-off EQ collar at the rear
of the mic.

MOUNTING TENSION The new, optional MZS 421 Shockmount clip ($50) may
quiet the perennial objections about the standard, but hard to wrangle,
421 clip. The MZS 421 a lot easier to work with than the standard clip. The
MZS 421 has a slot in its base into which the standard clip slides. After
that, the mic slides right into the suspension mount and is snugged by the
rubber bands of the mount and the metal shoe that slides into the slot in
the bottom of the mic itself.

Seven years ago, when I got my first DAW, I had to stop using my MD 421
because positioning the mic within several feet of the computer monitor
turned the mic into a Ònoise antennaÓ that picked up a substantial amount
of hash radiated from the monitor. IÕm happy to say I have a new, more
environmentally friendly computer monitor. The original 421 and the 421
II, both could be positioned to pickup some noise from the computer
monitor, but far less than with the previous model.

IN CONCLUSION The only caveat I have about new 421 II is that its
brightness may result in sibilance. Using the open-cell foam pop filter
suggested by Sennheiser will reduce the tendency. Using an Air Corp
500PH mic preamp/processor, I punched in the sibilance control circuitry
and made a quick cut of a few dB at 2.5KHz with a reciprocal boost at
5KHz. That took care of any sibilance and further opened up the top.
Similar approaches with other equalizers should provide the equally
acceptable results.

The cardioid pattern of the 421 II is as tight as its predecessor. As such,
this mic is well-suited for relatively noisey environments, like radio
studios or live sound or multi-mic recording. To get the proximity bump,
you need to be within two and a half inches and pretty much dead center.
That makes it a great jock mic, but a poor choice for talk show guests who
donÕt know how to work a mic.

So hold on to your MD 421s, they will probably only go up in value from
now on. And, if youÕve shied away from the 421 because it wasnÕt quite
bright enough, itÕs time to step up to the MD 421 II for another try.

http://www.tyford.com


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Scott Dorsey]

Ty Ford wrote:

They revamped the capsule and when I first got it to review, I was mildly
disgusted by the nasty little peak the 421 II has. Wait, here's my review...

The original 421 element was designed to be field-repairable. The diaphragm
assembly can be easily replaced on the bench. In 1970 when studios all had
maintenance shops, this was a big deal. Forty years later it's a disadvantage
since it makes it more difficult and expensive to make the element, and they
don't want to sell repair parts anyway.

The new 421-II element is designed to be cheap to manufacture. I don't know
if that presence peak was added deliberately or as a side-effect of cost
cutting, but it defeats the whole purpose of using a 421.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

On 2010-08-22 said:
That's why I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...
But very shreiky on guitar amps, I've found. And loading doesn't
help, where a '57 loaded properly and stuck in front of a gat amp
'grows balls'.
INdeed it does, but I"d assume the op has some 57's. HE's
probably looking for something else, but the 57 is always my
first pick for that app.

wHat I *have* used to good effect, the old Jimmy Page fat
amp sound, is the 57 in the usual position, and something
else getting some air on it, including a 421, old style of
course.
Wish I still had the recordings I had of this for of alterna
punk wtf band in the brick warehouse. WE put the lead gtr
amp in the fire stairs, put a 57 right up close and personal
with it, and I think a 421 on a gooseneck clipped to the
handrail of the stairs above it. Balls and presence to the
max.





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[david correia]

In article ,
"geoff" wrote:

wrote:
?

I like the 421 myself, and I"m the guy who said "be very
scared ... " so I'll weigh in.
A 421 is a good one. IT's a good player for your mic
locker, has lots of uses. YOu can't go wrong with one.

If my home studio project starts to get some clients, it'll
probably be mostly local punk/hardcore. Maybe this will help
explain my mic choice. I do, however, want to make sure that if the
studio grows I have a versatile kick mic that's good for more than
one or two sounds.
That's why I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...

But very shreiky on guitar amps, I've found. And loading doesn't help,
where a '57 loaded properly and stuck in front of a gat amp 'grows balls'.

geoff




I you like 421's on kicks, you will fall in love when you stick a Beyer
M88 - the original one, not the TG they sell today - in front of your
bass drum.

Of course, it sounds great on many things, including vocals.





David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com

[adam79]

On 8/22/10 5:11 AM, geoff wrote:

The XLRM-XLRF ['micloader'] 'adaptors' are a good way to go.


So they do make an adapter with the transformer.. and it's called a "mic
loader?" I found an Audio-Technica adapter (Model# CP8201). Can you
please check the link below; to let me know if this is the adapter I'm
looking for..
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/el...0ea/index.html

Thanks,
-Adam

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/el...0ea/index.html

[adam79]

"geoff" wrote:

I like the 421. IT's also a good vocals player
in the right circumstances, horns at times ...

But very shreiky on guitar amps, I've found. And loading doesn't help,
where a '57 loaded properly and stuck in front of a gat amp 'grows balls'.

david correia wrote:

I you like 421's on kicks, you will fall in love when you stick a Beyer
M88 - the original one, not the TG they sell today - in front of your
bass drum.


Haven't heard of the M88; I want to check it out. So back to the mic
rental.. to answer a question further up the thread, I found a local
store that rents mics, so I don't have to deal w/ shipping, etc. It's a
good deal.. $20 for mic, stand and cable.

I'd like to get enough money to rent both the RE20 and MD421 (they both
sound versatile in the same areas). It's the next mic I plan on buying,
so comparing them would be a good idea (for a future owner). What is the
difference in sound between the RE20 and MD421 (on the kick)?

Another mic I have on my wish list is the Cascade FatHead II Ribbon Mic.
I like the sound of combining the close mic'd SM-57 and distanced ribbon
on guitar cabs. I'd obviously rather buy a Royer, but it's too much
money. When you guys talk about using the RE-20 or MD421 is it ment to
be placed at a 4-6" distance (like the ribbon method)?

Thanks,
-Adam