recordinghacks


Help Wanted!

Write for RecordingHacks?

We’re expanding our team of engineer/authors. If you’d like to write for one of the best pro audio blogs on the web, please get in touch.

Read more about our Writers’ Bonus Program.

Photographers Needed

We have documented a great number of obscure, discontinued microphones. But there are even more left to do.

The hard part is getting decent photographs; this is one of the reasons many mics are not in our database. If you own such a mic, you could help us by shooting some pictures of it.

Quick tips for better mic photos:

  1. stand the mic up on its XLR jack against a neutral wall (ideally white) — or better yet, stand it on a curved piece of posterboard to create an “infinite background”.
  2. turn on every light in the room, and open the windowshades. You want as much ambient light as you can get.
  3. Turn off the camera flash. A single-point flash will more likely than not ruin the photo.
  4. Turn the camera sideways (portrait mode). Unless you’re shooting a really fat microphone.
  5. Use a tripod if possible, to avoid camera shake.

Link to the site!

Show your support! Link to the site with one of our mediocre banners. (In my defense, they’re not all ugly.)

RecordingHacks.com

99 Responses to “Help Wanted!”

  1. Gregory Galfo - Producer / Engineer Anvil Records

    January 26th, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    Hi, I love your website and refer to it often ! Congrats !

    Just wanted to point out that ADK’s Thor mic has not been released as of this date. (Jan.26, 2012)… you have it as being released in 2010.

    Thanks for a super website ! Much appreciated. PS…. your “mic graph” is outstanding !! Bravo !!

  2. Joe

    February 17th, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    Are the GLS Audio products added to the database? If I am overlooking them, I apologize.
    Great site, helps with school tons.

  3. rick winking

    April 3rd, 2012 at 8:31 am

    On the page where you have listed recent price drops, sub MAP pricing, etc. you had the Blue Dragonfly listed at $399. needless to say, I was excited and about to buy a pair of them, so I clicked on the mic and the cheapest price I could find was $599. Any idea where the $399 price came from? I would love to get a pair for acoustic guitars!

  4. John

    April 19th, 2012 at 10:40 am

    Why no audio samples for the RØDE Broadcaster & Kel Audio HM-2D ?
    Same for M-Audio Luna II & M-Audio Sputnik…

    I’m looking for a great broadcast (radio) microphone.

    Shure SM7b is great but need a high end preamp (too much background noise because of that).

    I like the sound of the Electro-Voice Models RE20 & RE320 and the Variable D design to control the microphone’s proximity effect.

    But then found that the RØDE Broadcaster & Sennheiser MD-421 II might be better… (less amplification needed and sound great for broadcasters).

  5. John

    April 19th, 2012 at 10:41 am

    What about the Shure Beta58a for broadcasting??

  6. John

    April 19th, 2012 at 11:03 am

    Please post audio (male & female voice) samples of both Kel Audio HM-1x & Kel HM-2D.

    Thank you!

  7. Chris Lilley

    June 12th, 2012 at 11:36 am

    sE4 page states that the product photo shows only a single pad position. (i agree, that photo does, so your caution is warranted).
    As an sE4 owner I can confirm that the product photo must be old/pre-production. On mine there is a three position switch with -10 (left) 0 (middle) and -20dB – as the spec sheet says.

  8. matthew mcglynn

    June 12th, 2012 at 10:05 pm

    @Chris, fixed. Thanks.

    @John – we hope to include Rode and Kel samples in the future. Regarding the SM7B, we’re getting ready to launch a shootout of affordable preamp/interface boxes that work well with the SM7B.

  9. Chris Lilley

    June 19th, 2012 at 2:33 am

    The frequency response plots for the omni and cardiod capsules on the MXL V67N page are blank. (The Oktava capsule one works though).

    The three frequency resonse plots for the sE4 all look the same. The ones on the manufacturer website look different, in particular the hypercardioid has a small presence dip (as noted in the TapeOp review, below).
    http://www.seelectronics.com/se4-mic

    For the sE4, it may be worth noting the EIN of 14 dB(A) which is pretty good for an SDC (although with a 19mm capsule, it is more of a MDC) and there are two relevant reviews, TapeOp and SoS
    http://www.tapeop.com/reviews/68/se4-small-diaphragm-condenser-mic/
    http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar09/articles/seelectronicsse4.htm

  10. Chris Lilley

    July 7th, 2012 at 2:55 am

    I found frequency response and polar plots for the Alctron BC400 at

    http://i00.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/607/762/406/406762607_842.jpg

    linked from

    http://www.aliexpress.com/product-fm/495633802-Free-shipping-pro-studio-FET-condenser-microphone-recording-microphone-Transistor-electric-capacity-microphone-wholesalers.html

    (fearsome peak!)

  11. Chris Lilley

    July 18th, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    I suspect that the t.bone SC1200 is the same as the Ningbo Alctron Electronics Co., Ltd. BC400 based on the shape, position and labelling of the three switches, and the shockmount.
    http://www.thomann.de/intl/the_tbone_sc1200.htm

  12. Chris Lilley

    October 12th, 2012 at 5:11 am

    The error on the sE4 polar plots, which i reported in June, is still there. Could this be fixed, please?

  13. James Arrow / ARROW CINEMA

    March 26th, 2013 at 5:47 am

    AUDIO TECHNICA AT5400/ le review/database ERROR: the frequency response curve posted for this mic is most incorrect. the correct chart is posted on the regular AT5400 review as the capsules are the same. I have the Limited Edition AT5400/ le mic, purchased new and it included an actual bench tested performance chart on the serial numbered mic I received, and the performance is almost the same as the properly posted graph you used for the regular at5400 with slight variations that are normal for fractional production performance quality control.

    THIS SITE IS GREAT AND MY KUDOS AND THANKS TO ALL WHO CONTRIBUTE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!

  14. Antonio Jordan

    April 20th, 2013 at 10:13 am

    Just wanted to let you know that the CAD M9 has now been discontinued also.

  15. Albert

    August 3rd, 2013 at 7:21 pm

    Another sibling for the Apex Electronics 591, the t.bone SC1000:
    http://www.thomann.de/fr/the_tbone_sc_1000.htm
    58 euros.
    Thanks for this site!

  16. Jesse Gimbel

    September 13th, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    I’ve got an update for the Telefunken AR-51 page. According to Telefunken’s website, starting serial #760 and up the mic has a new capsule – the TK51D, which is a 34mm edge-terminated capsule, rather than the original 32mm center-terminated TK67 capsule that the AT-51 originally shipped with. This results in “a frequency response with an extended low end and a smoother, open high end” compared to the 67-style capsule, which evidently it was never intended to ship with in the first place. Just noticed this as I’ve been looking into getting an AR-51 myself.

    Keep up the great work, I love this site! Hope to work with you at some point, aside from being a recording engineer I’m a graphic designer and photographer, always especially looking to be involved with other people in the music/pro audio equipment business. Take care!

  17. Troy Sutler

    September 14th, 2013 at 1:49 pm

    Your Neumann U89i states the mic was released in 1990. I believe it was 1980.

  18. Troy Sutler

    September 16th, 2013 at 1:50 am

    Actually my U89 is from 1979.

  19. Dave Bluefield

    November 16th, 2013 at 9:30 am

    I own a CAD Audio VX2 and when I moved the strings that hold the mic in place got dislodged and it has proven impossible to figure out the arrangement….is there a photo of how the strings are attached?

  20. Stuart Edge

    January 26th, 2014 at 1:35 am

    Regarding your write up on the Bob Heil PR-35 which I have and like so much phantom power is NOT required and would expect it to be damaged if phantom power was used, consequently I have not and will not test it with pp

  21. matthew mcglynn

    January 26th, 2014 at 8:25 pm

    @Stuart, we have not claimed that the PR-35 requires phantom power. I believe you were misreading a review excerpted on the page; it says “they require phantom power,” referring to “hand-held capacitor mics.”

    The PR 35 does not require phantom power but would not be damaged in any way if phantom power were applied. Moving-coil dynamics are not damaged by phantom power; you’re thinking of ribbon mics, and even there the risk is somewhat overblown.

  22. R. M. Burrow Jr.

    March 20th, 2014 at 5:16 am

    Add the Altec M-30 (vintage Altec) to the list of mics using the subminiature EF732/5840 tube.

  23. Charles

    April 2nd, 2014 at 10:15 am

    Hi
    Regarding Heil PR35 the new (2012) version is little
    bit different than the original (2008) version1 show in your site:

    -The body is different
    -The capsule design, the resonator disc, the lateral window are differents.
    -The rejection is better in new model, the bass roll off swicth have now
    just one patern.
    -The new version sound good but I preffer the old version (less mid),

    Charles, Quebec city

  24. R. M. Burrow Jr.

    May 16th, 2014 at 6:03 am

    Correction; the Altec M-30 (and perhaps the Altec M-21) condenser mics use the 5840 tube. The capsule is polarized by the floating grid.

  25. Jerakd

    May 17th, 2014 at 9:38 am

    “The mic ships with the MZS 40 shockmount, the MZW 41 foam windscreen, and a “pressure build-up ring.” The ring is not adequately described by Sennheiser, but we presume it to be a rubber doughnut that slides onto the end of the microphone to perform acoustic equalization of high-frequency audio, even though this seems redundant given the electronic EQ switch.”

    Not true at all, the ring increases the directivity the same way the sphere in the M50 operates, and the optional spheres for other mic’s, including Neumann’s and DPA omnis. They boost freq from about 3 to 8k by about 2.5 dB from the front while simultaneously attenuating by the same degree the same frequencies from the side (especially at oblique angles) and rear resulting in a significant increase of directivity. The EQ switch is just that, it is a compensation for the diffuse field, and it operates on the entire polar pattern. The ring and EQ switch can each be used separately or together to produce the desired effect.

    There is graphic documentation supplied with the mic showing the effect of the ring, the effect of the EQ, and the effect of the two together. It’s not so easy to find this online anymore, but it still comes with the product.

  26. Bill Scherer

    September 23rd, 2014 at 8:06 pm

    http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Miktek/PM9

    “The mic was released in 339.”

    Could you please review the popular preamps of that era?

    Thanks!

  27. Jason Bradley (AKA "tINY" @ gearslutz)

    September 24th, 2014 at 6:51 am

    CAD E300s is a completely different model from the E300.

    I bought one. It has a very low noise floor and no batteries. It’s a hyper/super-cardioid side address mic with a very flat and wide body.

    -tINY

  28. Jason Bradley (AKA "tINY" @ gearslutz)

    September 24th, 2014 at 6:55 am

    CAD E100s…

    Strike that. It s a “100” base number on my mic, not a “300”.

    -tINY

  29. matthew mcglynn

    September 24th, 2014 at 8:53 pm

    @R.M. – when we get enough info on the Altec mics to enter them, we’ll do so. Thanks for the feedback.

    @Jerakd – thanks for the correction. I’ve amended the MKH 20 profile.

    @Bill – stay tuned for our upcoming all-analog “Papyrus vs Stone Tablets” shootout.

    @tINY – we like the E100S also. Great little mic, very respectable self-noise performance.

  30. Tobias Bigger

    February 22nd, 2015 at 10:01 am

    Hello Matthew,

    Great website, wonderful source of information, thanks a lot for your work!

    Concerning http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Rode/NTR :
    Do you have any info about whether the NTR has a symmetrical response from back and front side?
    Polar pattern shows some slight differences between front and back, but whether this indicates a “dual-voice” ribbon (like some AEA, Royer, Shure etc.)??

    Might be difficult to find out, but I find this mic interesting and just wanted to point out this question. “Difficult to find out” because the manufacturers don’t seem to know themselves, at least my two e-mails to RØDE so far remain unanswered at all, for several weeks.
    Perhaps RØDE hadn’t known anything of “dual-voice” before, so I caught them on the wrong foot…

    Thanks again and best wishes,

  31. foofoo

    May 4th, 2015 at 6:15 pm

    sE Electronics X1 USB should be tagged 24 bit. It does 24/192

  32. Mark Van Buskirk

    May 23rd, 2015 at 5:37 pm

    Hi,
    Great website. I refer to it often. Your description of the Beyerdynamic MC840 states the the earlier version, the MC740 is also transformerless. You might want to check on that. I’m pretty sure the MC740 has a transformer.

    Keep up the good work,
    Mark

  33. Stefan Lindberg

    October 4th, 2015 at 12:16 pm

    Hi,
    I just want to point out a minor error on the U47 page:
    You write: “The pattern switch was located on the microphone body, and worked by disabling the polarization voltage to the rear diaphragm.”

    This is not true. The polarization voltage in a U47 is only connected to the capsule backplate, not to the membranes. The pattern switch connects the back membrane to the front membrane when in omni, and disconnect the back membrane from the front when in cardioid mode.

    Keep ut the good work!
    Stefan

  34. Chris Woolf

    October 11th, 2015 at 4:14 am

    I’m afraid this is just wrong.

    “RF condenser use a relatively low capsule polarisation voltage, and a relatively loose diaphragm tension. The low impedance audio from the capsule can drive a bipolar transistor directly, avoiding the need for relatively high-noise FETs. The low noise signal can be equalised to deliver a desired frequency response”.

    A more correct versions would be:

    An RF condenser uses an electrostatic (capacitor) capsule in a low impedance mode, thus avoiding the need for a very high impedance buffer. This allows the choice of bipolar transistors as well as FETs or thermionic valves (tubes). The capacitor has a radio frequency (RF) bias which is frequency modulated by the acoustic signal. This signal can then be demodulated in what is, in effect, a simple FM radio receiver, prior to output buffering.

    In many RF “condensers” a low level of electronic EQ is applied to adjust the frequency response, and the use of essentially low-impedance circuitry makes these microphones highly insensitive to humidity, unlike conventional DC biased capacitor microphones.

  35. Michael Norton

    November 6th, 2015 at 7:54 pm

    On the page for the SE Electronics sE2000 ( second generation ) http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/SE-Electronics/sE2000-v2 The frequency graph fails to open properly Is this because you don’t have the image available?
    I’ve tried to find it elsewhere and drawn a blank.
    Keep up the good work…. an invaluable site for so many reasons.
    Cheers Michael Norton

  36. Jesse

    December 21st, 2015 at 8:51 am

    I’m writing a Wiki article for wiki.diyrecordingequipment.com and I noticed on the page for the Oktava MK-219 it says the mic has a low pass filter, which should actually be a high pass filter (or low cut, whichever you’d like to call it).

    Jesse

  37. Ask Kæreby

    April 14th, 2016 at 6:15 am

    The AKG D 1000 docs has quoted sensitivity re microbar, not pascal, so it would produce 2.3mV at 1 Pascal, comparable to the SM57. Just a heads up 🙂

  38. Michael Norton

    April 15th, 2016 at 7:13 pm

    The street price on the Sputnik is probably a typo.
    Great site Matthew

  39. Pete Conzelman

    June 8th, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    Cool site. Based on article I picked up an MXL v250 a while back, deeply discounted. The pic of circuit board for MXL v250 looks nothing like the one I recieved. Old pic? In the text “the photos we’ve seen is identical to the MXL 2006 and MCA SP-1”, so I’m guessing it actually is a pic of one of those mics or they’ve changed the manufacturing quite a bit. I’d be happy to send photo if you’re interested.

    Also article states that “MXL has published no specifications for this microphone, but we assume they are similar to those of the SP-1.” which, if was true, is no longer. Spec included in the package.

    Regards,
    Pete

  40. William Marlow

    September 15th, 2016 at 8:47 am

    Neumann U89i page states that the microphone was released in 1990. It was actually released in 1979. I have a 1980 model mic with original documentation.

  41. Wayne Dixon

    October 19th, 2016 at 12:29 am

    I tripped over your page on the CAD KBM412 & where you state that the specs listed in the linked PDF spec sheet don’t match the specs on CAD’s website.

    Well…. yes & no… they don’t match the specs in CAD’s 2011 catalog (which they still use to this day apparently… it’s what their site still links to for a catalog), but the specs in that PDF manual do match the specs listed for the mic on its page on CAD’s website.

    http://cadaudio.com/products/product-application/kbm412

    It’s the catalog that’s wrong. Which, CAD has never corrected. If you notice the catalog specs for the KBM412 & the D12 you’ll notice they appear identical. Including the frequency response graphs. The specs & freq. resp. graphs are for the D12, & are erroneously duplicated to the KBM412.

    I’ve heard & used both, they are indeed different.

    The bad news here is that due to the confusion that abounds (I’ve seen that same D12 freq resp graph posted all over the internet not only incorrectly used for the KBM412, but used for the D10 as well), you have incorrect information on not only the KBM412 page, but the D12 & D10 pages as well. For example, you have the freq.responce specs reversed between the D10 & D12, along with the freq.resp. and impedance for the KBM412 being incorrect.

    For openers, you can take the freq.resp. graph you have on the KBM412 page & move it to the D12 page. The rest of the D12’s specs should read:
    Pickup Pattern: Cardioid (0.5 mV/Pa; 30 – 12,000 Hz)
    Impedance: 60 ohms

    Specs for the D10 should be:
    Pickup Pattern: Cardioid (0.45 mV/Pa; 50 – 16,000 Hz)
    Impedance: 60 ohms

    & finally, the KBM412:
    Pickup Pattern: Cardioid (0.56 mV/Pa; 25 – 15,000 Hz)
    Impedance: 150 Ohms

    The correct freq.resp. graph for the KBM412 would need to be copied from the PDF spec sheet linked on the page, & the one for the D10 pulled off the CAD catalog.

  42. Mustang Martigan

    October 25th, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    I lucked out when buying my pair of MCA SP1’s as they are the original models that can be modded easier. I have a couple questions regarding the various mods.
    – Is there a website that lists the DIY mods available for this mic and what they are?
    – what side of the mic is the capsule on (the side that picks up sound)? Is it the same side the circuit board is on that you show in the picture, to distinguish if one has the original SP1 (right side) or the newer model (left side)?
    -what is the capsule replacement that works best for use as a drum overhead? Is the capsule replacement the mod that improved the sound the most? Is it a different mod? Or a combo of mods?

    Thanks,
    -Adam

  43. matthew mcglynn

    October 25th, 2016 at 5:26 pm

    @adam, see http://micparts.com/

  44. Wayne Sung

    January 9th, 2017 at 3:38 pm

    The AKG C460 page says the pad and filter cannot be simultaneous. This is incorrect – the -10 dB position actually includes the 70 Hz rolloff. This info comes from the AKG technical description.

  45. angel

    January 29th, 2017 at 2:53 pm

    Checking the page for the MXL 2006, I found that the picture of the circuit wasn’t the same as the actual 2006.

    Las week I opened that microphone to check some ground-noise problems, ans I found that the circuit is not discrete, and it’s completely different from what the picture in this page shows. It seems like MXL have changed it over the years.

    I couldn’t make any decent photo of the new circuit, sadly.

    Thank you for keeping this page, it’s quite useful 🙂

  46. Michael Myers

    July 15th, 2017 at 10:43 pm

    Just wanted to let you know the the info you have on Avantone CK-1 could be adjusted. A few years ago they swapped the capsule build and now the capsules are screwed on top in a complete one-piece capsule/cover like most of the other mics on the market. My CK-1 is probably 5-6 years old, so it’s been awhile.

    Thanks, as always, for this great site! I’m here at least weekly doing research on mics and mic issues.

  47. David H

    August 3rd, 2017 at 4:56 am

    The frequency response charts for MXL V67N are blank

  48. matthew mcglynn

    August 10th, 2017 at 6:29 pm

    @Angel, MXL migrated the 2006 from though-hole to surface-mount construction sometime around 2013. More info here:
    http://recordinghacks.com/2013/03/19/mca-sp1-smt/

  49. Andrei

    October 15th, 2017 at 9:09 pm

    The link for the “Electronic Musician, 2005-11” article, on the beyerdynamic M 160 & M 260 pages, needs to be updated to:

    http://www.emusician.com/gear/1332/ribbon-revival/35851

Leave a comment