x
anonymous 26 August 2003

i might buy one for $180 USD
i read everyone flaming the C1000
but I'm hoping the C3000 is different
I'm just kinda beginning my pro tools recording ventures. and this would be my kinda main large-D condenser i would like to use for a lot of applications (dont worry i also have a pair or small-D condensers and 2 57's and a 58)
so is there any other large-D mic i should look into or is this is pretty good deal?
-chris

Comments

Alécio Costa Tue, 08/26/2003 - 18:26

I´ve got 2 of them. They are nice/reasonabble for:

* Sax Alto
* Sax Tenor
* Toms
* violins
* viola
* emergency backing vocal mic

I paid around $300 here in Brazil.

The C2000Bs´are somewhat similar, slightly little less mids, not so clear on tops, seems to have a litle more gain than the C3000Bs.

Check the GT55 also. It has less high mids than the C200B/C300B, fuller bass response, but a little noisy. The GT55 shall do fine for:
* Tuba
* Eufonio
* Bass Cabinets
* Kick
* Toms
* Cello

Hope it helped ya
:)

anonymous Wed, 08/27/2003 - 00:21

I have two C1000's which I kind of like for some recordings, they sometimes sound great on heavy guitars.

I have two C3000's also and those are quite different, very bright sounding mics. I only use them for hi hat or sometimes OH. I've tried them on many things, but the mics sound much too bright and harsh.(IMHO)

If I may say so, you are probably a lot happier with a SP B1 which also a lot cheaper.

falkon2 Wed, 08/27/2003 - 06:07

The guy who did our indie live album used a C3000B to rerecord the vocal parts - I found that the frequency response was a little too... "studio" that it sorta stuck out in front of the mix a little much. It's like the mic has some kind of cut around 2kHz, and is a little bright.

Edit: Bingo... found some freq. response charts, right on the money - there's a dip at 2kHz about 3dB, 1 octave Q on the mic. Perhaps should try experimenting with some EQ? I do think that it's a decent mic for it's price, despite it's "brittleness".

Davedog Wed, 08/27/2003 - 08:11

I LOVE AKG mics....except the entire "C" line although I did hear some tracks that were recorded with a C4000...acoustic instruments mostly...I remember the mandolin sat nicely in the mix because of its particular natural curve(the mic)...Anyway, it seems the AKG company decided awhile back to build a line of cheap prosumer grade mics aimed specifically at the project and home studios.And I think they did these just prior to the glut of similar mics which now are so prevelant.IMHO they missed the mark on all of them.They are all too harsh in the upper mids and too sibilant for my tastes.Even comments by those who have them indicate that they're ok as long as you EQ or process in some way that makes them better.This to me is a sign that the mic performs poorly for many different sets of ears.And its a shame because there are so many AKG's that I would put up before a LOT of other more pricey mics.A 414 is an invaluable tool for a locker, and some of the SD's.. 451's etc are killer.And the headphones!!K240's!! Too bad there are such dogs in this kennel also.

anonymous Thu, 08/28/2003 - 07:48

Originally posted by by:
just a guess, but perhaps AKG was targeting those who were recording onto those super popular crap tascam tape recorders? I bet they wouldn't sound as "harsh" on them?

That is just plain nonsence. I have had a number of Tascam machines and those are very reliable machines.

I still have an MSR24S which I've bought new in 1992. I've never had a serious problem with Tascam machines and the sound is very good.

Needless to say a Tascam should be well aligned like any analog tapemachine.

So my dear friend, explain your problems with Tascam, phuleeze?

x

User login