Can you say “Costume Change!”
“Top artists told us what they wanted, and we listened.”
In 1981 you could apparently purchase an Anvil-briefcase loaded with seven ATM-41 mics, each in a different color. Seven corresponding mic cables were also included, as well as… touch-up-paint. The price of admission to this zenith of vanity? $1595 (list), aka $4080 at the pump this week.
Download a 4-PP chart from Sennheiser, circa 197*, on the subject of choosing the appropriate model of microphone for your application. Sample topics: Will you be recording animals?
Choosing a mic ain’t easy.
Download now. It’s all very logical. Sennheiser_Chart
Alright so this is a little confusing… Above is an advert for the Fairchild F-22 microphone, as published in 1965. This mic is known to be identical to the Syncron AU7A (see previous post)… so why was it advertised earlier, with a higher price, under the Fairchild name? Maybe I am getting my dates mixed up here… anyway, Primal Gear in Nashville had a pair of these things for pretty cheap recently, but I was scared-off by the necessity for updating the internal power supply, as Syncron mics require certain mercury cells that are no longer made (or legal, likely). Anyway… any of y’all using/have used the F22/AU7A? Let us know… living here in central CT, once-home of Syncron labs, I feel fairly certain that I will eventually stumble upon one of these things… no luck yet tho.
I recently reviewed the new (-ish) AKG “65th anniversary” model 451 and the very interesting D12 ‘VR’ model for our friends at ProductionHUB. Click here to read the article. The 451 ’65th,’ in particular, is an excellent deal for $400. I’ve been using it every day and it is yet to disappoint. If you are not aware of the new D12 and its remote-controlled frequency-contouring, you might find that interesting as well.
Download a 3pp article from B.E , 1965, on the subject of wireless microphones used for broadcast reporting. Author is R Fetterman. BTW: is that a large collection of RCA OP-7’s pictured above?
DOWNLOAD:WirelessMics
Above: RCA 77, BK1, BK5, and a slew of others, all referred to by their ‘alternate’ MA-designations: the MA-2311, 2313, 2314, 2315, 2316, 2317, 2318, and 2319. Can someone tell us why RCA used standard model names, MA designations, and MI designations? Was it so they could charge certain customers more money for the same products?
Oh and let’s not forget the SK–designations. Anyway, here’s the SAME products in the SAME publication one year later. Confusing.
So true. What more DO you need in a mic? The RCA BK-5 is one of my all-time favs. No other ribbon mic sounds remotely like it. If you dig ribbon mics, save up for one of these. You will not be disappointed. Especially if you need to tame a sibilant vocal while retaining an overall ‘bright’ and forward sound. Also killer on piano, guitar amps, and probably everything else, actually…
Today: just a round-up of some broadcast mics that caught my eye for some or another reason: above, the ‘Stanford-Omega’ condenser mic. This is an odd one. Anyone?
EV (electrovoice) 666. I think I have mentioned this one about a million times already: it’s the predecessor to the RE-20, a mic that I have used+ dig more than almost any other. EV 666’s appear in just a ton of great-sounding old TV music-broadcasts… Miles Davis on PBS comes to mind… I must have bid on these things on eBay about 20 times. No luck yet. Soon enough. Oh but BTW I finally did get an RE15 (and not cheap either…) and it is really, really underwhelming. Still my faith persists…
Sony TELEMIKE circa 1964, with an (up-to) seven-foot probe! And it comes with a built-in headphone amp. Wild…
AKG D-12 and C-60 circa 1963, a few years before the D-12 became the industry-standard in kick-drum mic’ing. AKG recently sent me one of their new D-12 ‘VR’ models to review, and it’s pretty great, although not a re-issue in any strict sense… full review to come soon.
And finally the EV 655, another favorite of mine… just great sounding omni mics, pretty incredible fidelity for units that were introduced in 1951. Lots more on this site about them.
Today at PS dot com: 70’s month nears its close with a quick look at some promising but lesser-known mics of the 70s. If you are using any of these pieces in the studio these days, drop us a line and weigh in. above: the Shure SM53, a high-end dynamic cardiod that seems to maybe have been Shure’s answer to the RE15? I’ve been trying to pick one these up on eBay, no luck yet… anyone?
And speaking of the RE15… after watching the prices slowly rise on eBay for the past year, I finally picked up one of these.. expect some audio clips/shoot-out here soon. I always ignored these in the past, i figured, I have an RE20, what’s the point… but I finally had to know. I recently worked with a contractor/tech from a major live-sound company who had 1/2 the stage mic’d with these things, swears by ’em… anyway, I am super-curious. They are apparently very hi-fi with very accurate off-axis response. More to come…
While on the subject of dynamic mics… above, the Turner Model 10 circa 1972. Those of you who’ve been following PS for a while will know that I am a big fan of obscure Turner models, especially the flagship models like the 510… I recently bought my second 510 for Gold Coast Recorders and I have to sadly report that it is not as awesome as the example I have had for years… Anyway, the Model 10 seems to have been a replacement for the 500/510 series… there is a super-rare Model 11 (likely the ‘selected’ hi-fi version of the Model 10) on eBay right now for really cheap… might be a good purchase for anyone looking for more interesting dynmics mics…
Above, the AKG D190 and D124! Finally some info on the D124… these turn up in my old 70s AKG catalogs (most of which you can download here on PS dot com), and I actually use this as the console talkback mic at GCR, but I had not realized that it was the replacement for the D-24. The D-124 is an amazing little piece of engineering, very nice smooth sound and incredibly small in size. D-190s are much more common, I tend to see these on CRList quite often.
Above: Shure SM5 circa 1969. I love the similar SM7, use it regularly, it seems to have become somewhat of a standard-bearer vocal mic these days… artists actually ask for it in the studio the same way some will ask for an 87 or 47 or 58…. The SM5 is much less common, no longer made, and consequently extremely expensive. Are any of y’all using SM5s for music or vocal recording these days? Thoughts?
Above: Sony ‘Superscope’ branded C-77, C-37, and C-55 circa 1969. A C-37 or C-37 Fet is very high on my wish-list… Never used any of these models.. anyone?
Above: the Electrovoice RE55 is introduced (1969). Interesting to see that the RE55 was the successor to the 655. I have a pair of 655 at GCR, very very old pair circa 1950, and wow they sound great. Fairly high self-noise for a dynamic, but for drum overheads it’s never a problem. Anyone using the RE55? Seem pretty uncommon…
Above: The AKG 412 circa 1972. Seems to be the final evolution of the C12 prior to introduction of the still-standard 414. Anyone using a 412? Is it significantly different than a circa 70s 414?
(update at close of article)
I was flipping thru a pile of old DB magazines and the above image caught my eye. Let’s see here… clockwise from top left we see a U87, an SM58, RE20, MD441, KM8(x), RE16, SM81, MD421, and then… wtf is that thing? In this collection of classic 70s mics, I recognized, and in fact often-use, all except that last little fella. On the table-of-contents page, I was told that this is an Audio Technica 813. Well, if at least SOMEONE, sometime, thought that it could stand in that lineup, I had to learn more…
Above: a 1977 advert introducing the AT 813. From the body copy, it seems like the mic was at least initially aimed at live-concert tapers and other semi-pro and amateur recordists (E.G., “(these mics) look, sound, and act very professional.” The use of the term ‘professional’ in advertising almost always indicates the contrary). The 813 is, like the much-more famous Shure SM81, an electret-condensor microphone. Electrets differ from other condensor mics in that the backplate is semi-permenantly charged rather than polarized via some external DC source (for instance, phantom power). Electrets are generally cheaper than ‘true’ condensors and therefore tend to get a bad rap, but hey I think we all recognize that SM81 aren’t all that bad… so they do deserve a look.
…But maybe not this look. Fast-forward to 1980, and the above-depicted ad SUGGESTS that the AT813 is ‘within a nickel’s worth’ of a Neumann U87. This… I found a little hard to believe. So what did I do? Well, I bought an original circa-’77 AT813 and made a side-by-side comparison with a similar-vintage U87. I made a quick recording using both mics and now you can judge for yrself.
Above: my much-loved and much-used mid-seventies U87. This is original version of this classic mic, and it actually can run on either AA batteries or phantom power (I use phantom power). This gets used on pretty much every session; they are not inexpensive mics but worth every penny. It’s actually my go-to mic for acoustic steel-string guitar, and I use it on certain vocalists as well.
…And above, my new (to me, that is) circa 77 AT813. The 813 also runs on a AA battery, a single battery, and the battery serves merely to power the onboard preamp (remember, this is an electret-condensor so the capsule requires no external polarization). Now, there is a later version of the 813 called the 813a which operates on either the AA or phantom power; I did not have that option here. (The 813A version apparently has much improved dynamic range when operating from phantom btw)
Above, the test-setup. You are going to hear a single finger-picked performance of my wonderful new Gibson J45. Let me digress for a moment here (I imagine that at least some of y’all are gtr plyrs) to report that Gibson’s quality has come a long, long way. Ten years ago I had an informal sponsorship with Gibson; they loaned me guitars for touring and even gave me a new Firebird V, which I still have… in my closet. The guitars just weren’t that good. Fast-forward to 2012, several of my clients at GCR have new Gibsons acoustics, and I was pretty impressed with them. So I got this new J45, and it sure wasn’t cheap, but good lord does it sound+play great. The fit and finish are up there with the best handmade ’boutique’ acoustics that I have seen, and for a lot less money. Definitely worth a look.
Above: you can see the capsule spacing for the recording here. This recording was made in my lil home composing studio, an 8×12 plaster room that sounds like… an 8×12 plaster room. You have been warned. Without further ado, here is the Audio Technica 813! The budget mic that challenged a Neumann!
LISTEN: AT_813
…and here is the identical performance via the U87:
LISTEN: U87
You are hearing no EQ, no compression, and both audio clips have been normalized so that they peak at -0.1db. So it’s pretty apples-to-apples. My $0.02? They don’t sound very similar. The U87 sounds much ‘prettier’ and there is less boxiness in the midrange. The bass seems to extend deeper. The highs are pretty comparable in terms of frequency extension. The biggest point in the U87’s favor, though, is the noise floor. The mic preamps (MBox2, baby!) were at approx the same level, but the U87 track has considerably less noise. I left a very long tail on the end of the passage so that you can compare the noise floor.
Now, in the 813s favor… the recording does not sound bad. Not at all, aside from the noisiness at the fade out (which, for most music sources, would actually not be as much of an issue… we are talkin solo- fingerpicked guitar here, it’s pretty quiet). Considering that these mics can be had for $50 on eBay, it’s certainly not a bad deal. At some point I will probably A/B this 813 with an SM81 and a few of the other SDCs around the studio; that would certainly be a more fair comparison.
Above: part of my LP collection/pile.
So what’s the point. I read about a cheap, forgotten condensor-mic in an ancient magazine, bought one, and voila! it’s not as good as other mics that I already own. As I hope y’all have surmised by now, the endless, compulsive digging and searching thru old audio gear and its related literature is not part of some nostalgia trip for me; nor am I one who believes that ‘vintage is better’ when it comes to audio hardware. The fact is, I wasn’t even alive when most of this stuff was made, and the two pieces of audio equipment that I use the most are Pro Tools and my late-model monitor speakers. But as someone who’s livelihood depends on putting sounds together, making sounds, and constantly trying to make the sounds fresher+bolder, I need to draw inspiration and techniques from somewhere. The present moment is full of wonders and technology often creates fantastic new tools that speed workflow and improve quality (Cleartune, anyone?), but the past is a treasure trove as well. And as a source of ideas + tools, the past does have one distinct advantage, vis-a-vis creating work that stands out. There is only one present, and we all live here, but there are an unlimited number of pasts. Pick a past that no one else is mining and you’ve got a pretty unique toolbox. Which brings me back to the LPs depicted above. Musicians tend to chuckle when I mention a bunch of songs that no one in the room has ever heard of, as I am known for being somewhat of an obscurist when it comes to rock music. But make no mistake: I like the Stones and U2 and Nirvana and (etc etc) as much as anyone else. I just don’t think that there is any point whatsoever in drawing inspiration or any kind of sonic blueprint from that material. It is just way, way, way too overdone. It’s been picked at and re-examined from every possible angle. Which is why I spend hundreds of hours per year looking through tens of thousands of dusty old LPs: just to find the ones that no one remembers. To a working producer like myself, those are the records of value. They are not necessarily better or worse. But they do offer many more possibilities in terms of being a springboard into uncharted territory.
*************
*******
***
PS: thought I should mention, while on the subject of ye olde Audio Technica: if you have not used their old ATM25 dynamic mics you are missing out… they recently re-issued these things for $280, and I have not heard the re-issue, so i can’t comment there… but the original ATM-25s, which I first used almost 20 years ago and I still use today… are pretty unbelievable, esp. for rock bass-guitar speaker cabs and as an inside-kick mic. Better than a 421 or 441 IMO. I picked up an ATM25 for around $100 a coupla years ago; they sold a ton of these things so if yr patient you can prolly find a deal.
update
An interesting comment was inadvertently inserted in a spot that no one would likely find it; I reproduce here for easier access.
“These early At mics were conceived by some ex Electrovoice engineers and salespeople.
Very well targeted and designed.
Regarding the AT813, AT831A and the ATM31 (same mic, different paint) had nearly identical on axis (cardioid) and especially off axis response to the U87. The U87 tended to get very omni at high frequencies so it sounded crisper off axis which is where some of the sound comes from in many cases, lending to it’s unique sound.
I sold many of them over the years and most people were very happy with the result. Remember this was long before cheap Chinese condensers. We also marketed a private label variation which was called a “C87″.”
Ending very shortly on eBay: a pair of 1950s Capps Condensor mics PLUS a pair of Altec Lipsticks (no power supplies). Current price for the pile: $231. Caveat emptor, certainly, but for that price yr doin great if even one of ’em works. I am so, so tempted. Click here for the auction. And click here for some period info on the very obscure Capps condensors.