Mic shure KSM32

[Martin Naef]

On 11.01.2012 17:53, Joost Schuttelaar wrote:
>> So, what about mikes? I think there are almost no really bad mikes
>> above a certain price point of, let's say, 150 euros. There will be
>> differences, of course, but for recording real instruments and
>> vocals - where you will almost certainly use compression and EQ - I
>> will bet you that the difference between most good mikes above 150
>> euros will be negligible, as far as your audience is concerned.
>> Again, it's all about what you do with the recordings.
>
> A bit of compression, or a bit of subtle EQ does way more on the
> sound of a mic than the mic itself... Mics hardly ever sound good -
> you need a great surrounding to make it sound good :)

I'm not sure I fully agree with the sentiments above. I agree that the 
vast majority of mics are not bad. I also agree that EQ and compression 
will have a much more dramatic effect than the mic, and so does the 
room. Still, I find that there are quite obvious differences between 
different mics that are hard to equalize in post-processing.

I remember comparing an AKG 414 against a Neumann TLM 109 years ago. 
Both were about the same price, both had an excellent reputation. Yet 
the Neumann brought out a quality in the flute that the AKG couldn't. On 
the other hand, the AKG sounded better on my own speaking voice. Since 
the flute was the main target, I bought the Neumann. I think I would 
have found it quite difficult to get that Neumann sound from the AKG 
recording in post.

BTW: Most of my recent recordings have been classical concerts with a 
pair of small condensers into a very neutral pre-amp / AD. The 
post-processing I apply is very minimal, so the character of the mic 
certainly shows in the final result.

I don't think one should get overly obsessed over mic quality (the law 
of diminishing returns certainly applies here), but choosing the right 
mic for a given instrument or voice is really important.

Martin