by Steve Cunningham
If you want to start a heated conversation among audio professionals, try asking the following question: “What’s the best voiceover mic for less than $300?” Actually, you can just use the form “What’s the best [blank] mic for less than [blank]?” Either way, you’ll hear lots of opinions (and perhaps a little verbal abuse).
The best answers I’ve heard are along the lines of “Whichever mic sounds best to you.” The truth is that choosing a microphone is a very personal process, involving some logic, some direct experience, and a lot of emotion. Tradition is also a factor — “We’ve always used RE-20s, and all our people like them” — but the past few years have seen the introduction of a number of inexpensive, large diaphragm condenser mics. This month we’ll take a look at a few Asian-built mics that you can buy for less than three hundred on the street.
THE DISCLAIMERS
First, keep in mind that buying a mic is a lot like buying a car. Nobody in their right mind buys a car sight-unseen. You have to go to the car lot, look at it from several angles, sit in it, open the trunk and hood, and most importantly, drive it. So while this piece may help you focus on one or two models, do yourself a favor and try them out before you plunk down your bucks. Borrow them, rent them, whatever, but try them first. Ideally you should do this in your own studio, but if that’s not possible then find a dealer with a reasonable listening room and connect all the candidates at once to get a fair comparison.
Second, we’ve set an arbitrary price limit of $300 street for this article. While these mics represent excellent value for the money, it’s still true that you get what you pay for. Many of these microphones are manufactured in China, and while they may claim to use the same capsule design as a German mic costing ten times as much, few pro engineers will mistake them for the real thing. A couple of models are also inconsistent from unit to unit, so it pays to audition more than one of them. Now, none of this implies that we’re comparing apples and oranges, because these mics are surprisingly good. But if you want the sound of a Neumann, you’re gonna have to pay for a Neumann.
Last but not least, YMMV. That stands for Your Mileage May Vary, and comparing microphones is a highly subjective process. I’ve been fortunate in that my frame of reference includes many “classic” (and expensive) microphones; my go-to voiceover mic is a big Lawson, and I use RE-20s and Sennheiser 416 short shotguns on a regular basis. Nevertheless, my ears ain’t yours and you may hate a mic that I like, so please do the homework and try ‘em out for yourself.
MARSHALL MXL V69ME
The Marshall Electronics MXL V69 Mogami Edition tube condenser microphone is so named because it features Mogami cabling throughout, from the inner wiring to the cables included with the kit. Its brass body is painted black, and the gold-plated grill makes it look pricier than it is, although when you pick it up you’ll figure out part of how they got the street price under $300 — it’s surprisingly light.
The V69ME comes in a kit with a hardshell carrying case, a well-designed shock mount, an external power supply box that provides phantom power, a 7-pin Mogami interface cable and a Mogami XLR cable. The kit retails for $399, and hits the street just under $300. The V69ME uses a 1" diameter diaphragm in a cardioid-only pattern. It has a 12AT7 tube for amplification and impedance matching, which in turn feeds the transformerless internal electronics. The specs claim an equivalent noise level of 14dB, and an SPL rating of a healthy 140dB. There’s no dB pad or roll-off filter on the V69ME, and while I didn’t miss the pad, I would liked to have had a roll-off to help control the mic’s proximity effect. When worked closely the mic has a tendency to go “humpy” in the lower midrange, especially with baritone men.
Having said that, the V69ME has a reasonably flat frequency response curve, with a slight scoop in the midrange, which is typical for tube mics in this price range. It definitely has that warm “tube” sound, and the tube harmonics helped impart a bit of “air” to a big-voice VO performance. I liked it less on a female VO, where that slight scoop tended to make her voice sound a little thinner than I liked, but even then the tube warmth kept her from sounding harsh.
The sturdy shock mount is worth a special mention, as many budget mics come with a sub-par shock mount (I have an AT4033 with a shock mount that’s currently held together with rubber bands). This is not as important as the quality of the mic itself, but a crappy shock mount will definitely slow you down during a session and annoy you in general.
The overall build quality of the V69ME is solid and the sound is above average, if a little dark in the low mids. This is a good mic for adding warmth, color and air to a male VO. It was impossible to overload, and has an acceptable level of self-noise. Coupled with a clean solid-state mic preamplifier, the V69ME provides a whole lot of bang for the buck.
STUDIO PROJECTS TB1
The Studio Projects microphones were among the first of the low-cost Asian microphones to hit the US. Their C-series microphones got solidly good reviews, at least after audio pros stopped sniggering about their unabashedly Chinese origins. Their B-series mics represent their new “budget” line, providing even lower-cost versions of the C-series. Of the three B-series mics available, the TB1 is the most expensive at $389.99 list, and $275 street — it’s sort of a less-expensive version of Studio Projects’ $699 T3.
The TB1 is a large-diaphragm cardioid mic, with a 1-inch, 3-micron capsule and a 6072 dual-triode tube for amplification. Its self-noise level is 16 dB (A-weighted), which is slightly higher than some of the other low-cost condensers. It comes complete with an external power supply, a mic clip, a 7-pin interface cable, and an aluminum-clad “road case” with a foam lining. I always have to wonder what would happen if manufacturers skipped the case and put that money into the microphone instead. Perhaps they could improve the clip and cable, as detailed below.
The mic clip initially gave me visions of a trip to the floor, as it’s a small thing that grips the mike at its bottom shank. But it turned out to fit the shank well and tightly. Still, the mic is a little too heavy for this clip — when trying to position it on its side, the clip kept rotating until I manipulated the stand such that it would sit at the required angle. PMI Audio’s website has instructions on how to tighten the hidden screw on the clip, and once that was done the mic stayed pretty much wherever I put it.
The special mic cable that connects the mic to the power supply was also a bit of a pain — the pins are tiny and thin, and if you’re not careful they’re easy to bend when inserting the cable into the power supply box.
The TB1 has much less of that “tube” coloration than the other mics I evaluated. However, I immediately noticed that it was substantially brighter than the others as well. A quick look at its frequency plot reveals why — there’s a noticeable rise that starts at about 2.5kHz and peaks at about 10kHz. This worked well for me in terms of adding “air” to VO performances, and after several recordings it seemed to me that the tube somehow prevented that airiness from becoming harsh.
Like the others, the TB1 has no low-frequency rolloff switch or pad. In this case I didn’t miss either one, since its proximity effect is quite tame. However, the TB1 was susceptible to popping, and it’s a drag that Studio Projects doesn’t include a windscreen. You’ll definitely want to put a popper stopper in front of this puppy if you’re going to do any close work.
Most of the female VO perform-ances I recorded were excellent through the TB1. The only exception was with one woman whose voice tends to sound cutting anyway, and the spot we recorded required her to give an energetic rant. Some of her peaks became shrill-sounding, with the mic’s high-end bump accentuating what was already present in her voice. With that exception, however, I liked the openness in the top end.
With the exception of the clip and cable, the build quality of the TB1 was very good. The sound quality was also good, with a flat midrange that worked well and required little in the way of EQ. This mic has a higher level of self-noise than I like, although at no time did it become a problem when recording. The top end peak is great for soft-to-normal VO reads, but one needs to be careful with gonzo scripts involving women. Well, that’s probably a true statement in any case (ducking).
RODE NT1-A
Another pioneer of inexpensive large diaphragm condensers is Australia-based Rode. Their NT1-A is a solid-state JFET cardioid condenser microphone with a 1-inch gold-plated capsule. Its nickel-satin finish is reminiscent of those German microphones, but it weighs substantially less than do any of those. There are no low frequency roll-off or pad switches, and the gold dot at the top of the casing indicates the side that should face the sound source. The microphone includes a well-built shock mount and a zippered carrying pouch, and lists for $349 with a street price of under $200.
At first glance the NT1-A is almost indistinguishable from the company’s earlier (and quite popular) NT1 microphone. But Rode says it has redesigned the electronics of the NT1-A to take advantage of its surface mount manufacturing techniques. It’s been my experience with inexpensive microphones that the electronics can make all the difference, particularly since the capsules have only slight differences. In this case the electronics seem to have made a difference indeed. The company claims that the NT1-A has a mere 5dB of self-noise. The low self-noise floor of the NT1-A is probably its greatest asset, making it good for close, low-volume promo work.
Sonically the NT1-A has a bump just below 200 Hz, giving it a bit of gravitas that worked well for most of the men I recorded. There are some peaks in the upper midrange, and a rise starting at about 5 kHz that peaks around 12 kHz. As a result, the NT1-A is open on the high-end, but occasionally harsh in the middle. Again, female VO artists tend to fare worst with this type of frequency response, and recording women with the NT1-A gave good, but not great, results. Recording male VOs was relatively easy, so long as they respected the mic’s proximity effects. The windscreen for the mic is optional — you’ll probably want it, even though the NT1-A is not over-sensitive to plosives.
Since the NT1-A is powered by J-FET transistors instead of tubes, there’s no tubey-warmth here as with the others. What there is here is a clean and open sound that’s ideal for male VOs, and works with female VOs with just a little caution. You can feel free to crank up the volume, without fear of noise build-up. It’s a simple, cost-effective condenser microphone whose build quality is excellent, and it’s as quiet as a church mouse. And with a street price of under $200, it’s the least expensive of the group.
A NOTE ABOUT THE PLOTS
Overall the NT-1A is the least flat of the mics evaluated, although you can’t readily see that from the plots. And this brings up a sore point for me — the Rode plot is calibrated at plus or minus 40dB (a total scale of 80dB), so the NT1-A’s frequency plot looks flatter than it really is. Compare that to the Marshall V69 plot at a total of 50dB, and the Studio Projects plot at 40dB. If you don’t take note of the scale, the Rode looks flattest and the Studio Projects looks least flat. On closer examination, almost the opposite is true. It’s up to you to pay attention when you’re evaluating mics, but if you use your ears you’ll be fine.
SO WHADDYA LIKE?
Dang, I knew you people would ask me that...
Okay, first the short answer: I like them all, for some things. Am I going to sell my Lawson? Not hardly, even though its plot is not flat, its self-noise is way higher than the Rode, and it didn’t come with a shock mount. I’m keeping it because I still like the sound of ME (and of most others) on it better than anything else. And that, dear reader, is the point.
Now the longer answer: these mics are incredible values for the money. They’re all very good, if not great, microphones, and coupled with a good preamp you’ll get a lot of mileage from them. Yes, they all have a hyped high-end to some extent. Yes, some of them are a little noisy. But they all cost less than most of the preamps to which they’ll be connected. If you’ve done all your work on an RE-20 for the past ten years, you owe it to yourself to go listen to these and others. You may end up with something that will give you a different sound, and that’s always a Good Thing.
For more information, visit Marshall Electronics at www.mxlmics.com, Studio Projects at www.studioprojectsusa.com, and Rode at www.rode.com.au.