Acoustic Guitar Mic

Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:53 pm

Hi, im looking for an acoustic guitar mic, i think it should be a small condesor mic ?! not sure though.. looking for it to be £100-($180ish)
anybody have any suggestions ?

Thanks alot[/list]

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:26 pm

Condenser, sure... jaja. This money? mmm... Maybe Samson or Behringer, or look for something used. And (if you don't care about loosing some high F detail), with an old SM57 your songs still will work. I don't know the actual prices in your country, perhaps you're lucky...

Dona
www.latierrita.net

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:01 pm

i use an SM57 for my acoustic guitar, and it really comes through. with a cord it came out to 110$ when i bought mine.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:06 am

oh right thanks ! i though a Shure SM57 was a dynamic mic.. i was already going to get one of those for mic'ing my amp ! but i was looking for an extra condesor.. i will have a look at samson and behringer !!

thanks alot

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:39 am

Both the Shure SM81 and the A-T AT4041 make MUCH better mics for acoustic guitars than the Samson/Behringer el-cheapo mics do. Check e-Bay, you may very well be able to afford one of those for just a little bit more money.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:19 pm

yer, looking at the prices of the sm81 and the AT4041 i would hope they were much better ! the prices.. slightly out of my budget, especially the the sm81, maybe thats something to look to in the future ! thanks for your reply though, i will bear it in mind when looking for a better mic in the future !

so will i get a good quality sound from the SM57 when recording acoustic guitar ??

thanks alot

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:19 pm

I have great success with the at3035 as one of my ac guitar mics. $199 most places but can be had on ebay for as low as $138 or so. Self-noise is obscenely lower than anything else in it's price range, no hype anywhere on the spectrum and transients are handles fast and acurate without any grainy mids or spitty highs. Lows are tight, smooth and well represented. With the 3035 you can even get very sweet recordings even just plugged straight into the pre's of a simple m-audio FW interface. Plug it in to a nice tube pre and you won't believe it only cost you $140.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:43 am

i see !! thanks alot, ill take a look at that one

thanks

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:14 pm

The Marshall Electronics MXL 603s is excellent. I hear the MXL604 is also and has both cardioid and omni caps.

The Oktava MC012 (Russian only) is a great acou guit mic.

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:21 pm

I've found the MXL 603's to be hard to deal with on acoustic...all top and bottom and not so much mid. I like the AT2020's on acoustic. They're only $100 apiece, so you save a little more scratch, you can get a pair for $200 new. The 603's were nice on mandolin, though! ANDY

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:03 pm

I am by no means an expert, but from what ive seen a cheap condenser doesn't do that much for you. Ive recorded acoustic with 57's and i found it to have too much low end. So I tried a 58 and it sounded much better. I would take my opinion with a grain of salt though, but a dynamic wouldnt sound to bad either. Also a descent dynamic will always be useful to you. A behringer will not.

While were on the topic of condenser mics for acoustics, what does anyone think of the akgc1000s.

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 8:03 pm

Ataraxia wrote:

I am by no means an expert, but from what ive seen a cheap condenser doesn't do that much for you.

Not true. There are plenty of very good inexpensive condensers out there. drumist69's experience with the MXL603s is only one out of a hundred that I have encountered in recording forums. Most people, including experienced pros like Harvey Gerst, like the 603s on acou guit.

The Oktava MC012 is a studio standard.

Audio Technica, Shure, ADK, Marshall Electronic, CAD, Studio Projects, Rode are just a few manufacturers that make some excellent mic in the $100-300 range.

Ataraxia wrote:

Ive recorded acoustic with 57's and i found it to have too much low end. So I tried a 58 and it sounded much better. I would take my opinion with a grain of salt though, but a dynamic wouldnt sound to bad either. Also a descent dynamic will always be useful to you. A behringer will not.

These are the same mic, except the 58 has a ball. Neither sounds very good on acou guit IMO.

Ataraxia wrote:

While were on the topic of condenser mics for acoustics, what does anyone think of the akgc1000s.

Some people like these on guitar cabs. That is the only thing I've heard (from people whos experience I trust) that these sound decent on. My experience is that they sound terrible on acou guit. Very shrill. I wouldn't pay even $50 for one.

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:25 am

Thanks for clearing things up, I now know to stay away from that mic. Regardless of 57's and 58's being the same with one small difference. They still sound different, so regardless, thats why they are different mics. Otherwise their would not be a 57 and a 58.

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:54 pm

Ataraxia wrote:

Thanks for clearing things up, I now know to stay away from that mic. Regardless of 57's and 58's being the same with one small difference. They still sound different, so regardless, thats why they are different mics. Otherwise their would not be a 57 and a 58.

You are at least partly correct. They aren't exactly identical. But in your assessment of mics don't forget, because of the proximity effect and off-axis response, and even the room you are in, one or two inches difference in mic placement or the position or angle of the mic in relation to the instrument (guitar sound hole, e.g.) can often make a significant difference in sound, often in bass and/or treble response.

Here's a quote from Bruce Bartlett back in 2000:

Bruce Bartlett
"I was a microphone engineer at Shure.

The SM57 and SM58 are essentially the same, except that the SM57 was intended mainly for instruments and the SM58 for vocals. The SM58 has a ball grille that acts as a pop filter. The two mics have the same proximity effect at the same miking distance.

Because of its smaller grille, the SM57 lets you get closer to it for more bass boost. But if you are 2 inches from the diaphragm in either mic, they have the same bass boost.

They have a slightly different response at high frequencies because of the acoustical effects of the different grilles.

Hope this helps..."

Most people who have moderate experience with these two mics agree with Bruce's assessment.

Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:53 am

I guess there is nothing I can say against that.

This topic sponsored by: