x
anonymous 4 April 2005

Search found 13 matches

Is it me or is kurt pushing these mics pretty hard. KF usually has pretty harsh feelings against brands that are inexpensive and "budget", and I have not once seem him qualify these with "for the money".

Does anybody have any real reviews on these mics? Are they really any good?

Thanks,

Steve

Comments

sproll Mon, 04/04/2005 - 11:06

Is it me or are you just an a$$?

No moderator on here has hidden agendas. If any of them push a budget product, it's because they work well for the money. Check out a SP C1 mic and you'll understand why they get favorable reviews - but lo and behold, they are inexpensive.

I think its funny (sad) how you guys jump all over the guys because they say you can't get pro results with junk, and then you jump all over them when they say hey this budget gear works pretty good!

These guys are here on their own goodwill and are sharing their knowledge with people that want to learn. Frankly I'm appalled at some of the newer people's attitude around here - I'm not sure how Kurt puts up with the personal attacks, but I am glad he stays around to help the rest of us out.

Come on, cut these pros some slack. If you want to learn, then listen to what they have to say. What kind of credentials do you have to be naysaying anyhow? Have you even tried this mic? Doubtful.

*shakes his head*

frob Mon, 04/04/2005 - 12:11

my review;
i have finally got my long waited for KEL HM1's (yes i paid for a sterio pair), and i do mean long waited for it took over three week to arive and only from canada down to california (it takes less time to smugle hashish up from mexico). as i open the box i notice that each of them have a sticker with the sierial number, its large and awkward and looks as though its made to come off - though i was and am still hesitant to pull them off as i cant find the sierial number any where else on the mic. they should have engraved the sierials on the chasis or at least had a permanant stiker on them. the first thing i did was check out the frequancey chart, one per mic and this is when i noticed that the seirials where not just one after the other (1801, 1802) insted they where like 25 off (1818,1843) as i inspected the charts (printed strait from a frequance analyser) they where spot on. if you email them they will tell you that they hand pick there "matched pairs" this as you can see is true, as i can not tell a difrance between theis mics. the next thing i did was take the litle buggers apart. they are suprisingly well built, although they did not come with a shock mount thier internal shock works exceedingly well and the stand mount feels verry duable and solid. the case for theise things are verry sturdy and for a small diafram (or most modern large diaframs) they are heavy, but in a good way. the capsuls are visable from the out side and the protective screen look as though is there only to protect not to act as an internal pop filter.
the sound; unfortunatly i could not do an AB test of any "indestery standard" mics and the only pres i have had are my VLZ-pro and my Brick, and listend thru my msp5s. they are definatly a difrant sounding mic, not bright but clear and dark with a definate eadge and a litle air. they would be good for and under snare mic or room mic for percussion. they are also really good on acoustic guitar, at least for a nic fretty sound like old timey guitar, ive not had a chance to listen to them on vox yet. they sounded better on the brick though there was litle difrance between the two with this mic.
if youve got a home studio brewin, then i would definatly sujest one if not a pair of theise mic, they put an eage on practicly everything they are used to record, i cant think of any mic that they would be a defante replacment all the time for, but they are a defiante collor to add to your pallet. if youve got a highend studio i would recomend you try this mic, i know you have a large enugh mic cabinate but this mic is something that i think you could easaly find a use for and at $100US its worth a try.

frob Mon, 04/04/2005 - 12:23

about me i am not a pro, ive been working with my band Phoenix and the Turtle in variuse studios, wile i attemt to build my studio. ive recorded on tape decks and ProTools control24 Desks and 2" tape. im not a pro but im no idiot and my ears are preatie well trained, but like i said im no Pro, verry litle of my recordings goto CD and most is used for preproduction.

sorry about the double post the [edit] didnt work.

anonymous Mon, 04/04/2005 - 12:46

im not saying i don't like KF's reviews. but i have to take with a grain of salt a microphone that he recommends that is also a paying advertiser on his site. i just noticed him lobbying fairly hard for a microphone that doesn't fit his normal MO.

for instance, sebatron has a very good reputation on here with a lot of users, but if it was just kurt saying that they were great, i would be suspicious since they are obviously a paying advertiser here. i don't think it is disrespectful to ask for second opinions in this (rare) case. i just wanted some additional reviews. this was not a dis on kf, he is a wonderful resource.

i also have very little trust in anyone who refers to others on here as the "pros" thus implying they themselves are not pros makes me suspicious. it is just that "us and them" mentality that tricks people into believing that they cannot do what these others are doing, just because they do it for a living and we don't. the definition of a "pro" is so loose in the context it is thrown around. i've mixed better sounding recordings than some of the "pros" in town here, and they have been doing it a long time. and this is not me bragging about myself, this is others telling me. everything is subjective. i have a long way to go, and will continue to contribute and learn from this board.

the only thing that makes a "pro" is someone who does audio engineering as their "profession" thus, if i made the majority of my money recording audio, that makes me a pro. hmm. i would hardly consider that the basis of right and wrong in this industry.

thank you frob for your review. i found it quite helpful.

steve

maintiger Mon, 04/04/2005 - 13:07

I know that Kurt owns a seb and has used it in the real world and likes a lot- says its a great pre- I know he also owns a yamaha mla7 and has said he does not like it much- I say hey, if the guy owns it and likes it why are you questioning his motives?
I know he owns a Kel mic as well and has put it through the paces and likes it- hey, the man owns a U871 as well, so if he said he likes the kel, there must be something to it- cut him some slack, won't you-
and no, the mods here, myself included, are not paid and we do not have hidden agendas

anonymous Mon, 04/04/2005 - 14:05

there is a lot of b.s. and hype that is thrown around.

i did not and do not imply explicitly or implicitly that there is a hidden agenda. all i am saying is that he may be a bit biased based on the circumstances. i was looking for a real review from others in the community that have used this mic.

if you've been working with music for very long at all, you cannot get mad at me for wanting to read through the hype. in the 12 times that KF mentions the KEL, he does not once say "for the money". so to post in the "Pro Audio Gear" forum, I am going to believe that he feels this mic compares to other Pro Audio Gear. A good example of this is a SM57. It is not a good mic for the money ($80), it is a good mic. period.

a akg c414 is a good mic. period. in my opinion the SP C3 is a good mic. period. not for the money ($350) but just a good mic.

if I am going to invest in mics that are quality pro gear, I want stuff that is good, not good... for the money.

now lets get back to recording....

KurtFoster Mon, 04/04/2005 - 14:28

The HM-1 is a good mic period.
I would gladly pay 3 times as much for it. But you don't have to take my word for it. Kel has a 21 day return policy on them ... don't like it? Send it back and you get a full refund.

As far as advertising on RO goes ... I don't have anything to do with it and I do not write good or bad reviews based on whether a company advertises here or not.

Chris handles the server and the banner ads as well as a lot of other stuff ... I pretty much keep an eye out for spam and trolls and write posts and reviews. I do not get paid and it makes absolutely no difference to me whether an advertiser gets a good review or not. If you want proof of this, while you're searching though the archives for stuff to hang me with, try looking up "Secrets of The Pros" ... That guy advertised here and I hated his DVD so bad I wouldn't do a review on it.

Actually the way it works most of the time is I decide I like a product and ask for a review sample, then through my communications with the company they decide they would like to advertise on RO. When that happens, I hook them up with Chris or vice versa.

maintiger Mon, 04/04/2005 - 14:30

rudedogg wrote: Search found 13 matches

Is it me or is kurt pushing these mics pretty hard. KF usually has pretty harsh feelings against brands that are inexpensive and "budget", and I have not once seem him qualify these with "for the money".

Does anybody have any real reviews on these mics? Are they really any good?

Thanks,

Steve

Sounds like you thought his review wasn't 'real.' Sorry, but that was what you wrote- looks like you are adding 'for the money' yourself- hey, why don't you just ask him? If you pm him I am sure he'll be happy to give you a reply. For what I remember he said the mic was pretty good and he did not use any 'for the money' qualifiers, so it must be 'pretty good' on his book. Now, if you want someone else's opinion, not Kurt's, why don't you just say that -

anonymous Mon, 04/04/2005 - 14:41

Most of the people reading these forums are looking for gear that is good 'for the money', and I believe when Kurt recommends a less-expensive product, he does so based on what the topic/poster is looking for. I'm sure he wouldn't recommend it if we were to talk about the best guitar cab mic moeny-no-object... I would think this is all obvious.

As for the mic, I've never used it and probably never will. I've enough wasted space with gear other people have recommended. - actually, only one or two pieces of crap gear, but THAT'S ENOUGH FOR ME, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!! :) :lol: :wink:

frob Mon, 04/04/2005 - 15:06

i think that too many people use reviews for the wronge resone. most seem to like a peice of gear and then find a review in favor of it, buy it and not like it, then blame the reviewer. i have come to trust kurt in his honest reviews, however reveiwers are like monitors, if you find that they like stuff that is bright you need to take that into consideration, if you find a monitor that has good mid but no bass and you find yourself reaching for that eq every time and every time it sounds bass heavey, it not a problem with the reviewer more the people that cant learn from them.

"im not pro" well im not weather you like it or not i do not make my money in the recording industry. how long have i been recording? around 6-7 years. how long have i been any good? about 4.

this thred could have been mutch more tactfully done. thank you very mutch.

anonymous Mon, 04/04/2005 - 16:22

It seems to me my original post was completely misunderstood, until kurt's last post. if you re-read what i originally asked, it was

a) kurt is pushing a mic and not saying "for the money" which in my mind means it is actually a quality piece of gear

b) does anyone else have any real reviews of this (ie. not kurt, and "real" as in real world, not just hype or my friends uncle used one once...)

i feel like kurt understands what im asking, cause he clearly answers it in the last post. now all i wanted was other people to post their experiences. at $99 i should of just picked one up, and not bothered asking.

i did not mean for this whole thing to become contorted into some kind of name calling, moral questioning, spanish inquisition.

i really wish we could delete this thread and start over. holy crap.

steve

anonymous Mon, 04/04/2005 - 18:00

I'm not Kurt, nor do I play him on TV. I bought my HM-1 before reading Kurt's reviews on them (hell, before reading ANYONE's reviews on them for that matter) but I find I generally agree with him on most things. I have paying clients who come back for more because they like the results they get. Whether or not that makes me a "pro" doesn't concern me much anymore. So, FWIW and getting somewhat back on topic . . .

I've been using the HM-1 for a few months now and dig it. It's not for everything but, then, nothing is. Used it on congas, combo guitar cabs, flew it over a violin and just recently tried it on a snare. It's great when you want something a little darker or less strident than a typical low dollar condenser. Haven't tried it on vocals yet. I've run mine through a GR MP-2NV, Peavey/AMR VMP-2, a Groove Tubes Brick, and an ISA428 - all into a Radar/Ghost combination. To me it sounds like a darker version of the Studio Projects B1.

Bottom line IMO, it's a useful addition to a mic locker. Don't get hung up on the price, hell, 57's are cheap. Yes, they've proven themselves but I think the HM-1's will too over time. For the price you can't go wrong at least trying one out. If you don't like, you got 21 days to send it back for a full refund. Ya really can't lose with this one.

dudge Tue, 04/05/2005 - 15:12

maintiger wrote: the kel hm1 - anyone try hem on toms with good results? looking for new tom mics

I havn't tried the Kel mics, but I love the SP B1 on toms and B3 on floor tom. I find they just sound more real and detailed than any of my dynamic mics. I like them especially if you want to hear the overtones nice and clear, like a more jazz tom sound. The Kel may be great for this, too. I think the presence peak of the B1/B3 is a good thing for these applications.....then you don't have to add it with EQ.

Randyman... Wed, 04/06/2005 - 02:14

From my quick experimenting, I preferred the HM-1 on a low-tuned 13" rack tom over a D2, and I also preferred the HM-1 on a low tuned 16" floor tom over a D4 (on some cheapo mixer pre's). My other 2 HM-1's should be here in a week.

The HM-1 had fuller low-end than even the D4! I think it may be more of an exaggerated proximity effect, but it works for the low-fundamental sound I was going for (Heavy/Hard Drums). I can't wait to have enough nice pre's for all 4 HM-1's! I'm skimping on my Tom Pre's for now :( . The HM-1's are fairly HOT in a close-mic'd drum application, so you will likely need a PAD on your pre.

I didn't like the HM-1 "close mic'd" on a closed-back distorted guitar application, but this was at high SPL levels. I'll be trying a lower SPL open-back amp configuration later this month. I'm really leaning to the HM-1 more as my full-time tom mics for now, but experimenting is fun :wink: !

Later :cool:

KurtFoster Wed, 04/06/2005 - 12:39

Something I would like to point out again. If you don't have really great mic pres, the HM-1 (IMO) is a good solution for that "strident high end syndrome" that happens so often. Because the mic lacks that "presence peak" found on a lot of the cheap Chinese mics, it is better suited for use with the more common Mackie type mic pre. It can go a long way to making your recordings sound smoother and more "natural".

maintiger Wed, 04/06/2005 - 13:06

Kurt Foster wrote: Something I would like to point out again. If you don't have really great mic pres, the HM-1 (IMO) is a good solution for that "strident high end syndrome" that happens so often. Because the mic lacks that "presence peak" found on a lot of the cheap Chinese mics, it is better suited for use with the more common Mackie type mic pre. It can go a long way to making your recordings sound smoother and more "natural".

that's great- I know the rode nt1 sounds real good with good pres but thin and brittle through art pres and the like- its good to know this one is not like that :D

Sidhu Wed, 04/06/2005 - 14:20

i just bought the NT1A recently... bit peeved that i totally forgot bout the KEL mics... and now im out of money.... also bought the MC012 match hypercardioid pair from the sound room bout 4 months back.. ive got some ok recordings with that... i initially got em for overheads, but since i havnt yet had the oppertunity to record much drums, ive been using them quite a lot on Acoustic guitars.. mostly in stereo. I find myself usually cussing the brittle high mids im getting.. But them im running my mics through a Behringer UB preamp. Cheap Audiotrak AD converters, and the guitars at cheap. not to mention I record in a 10*10*10 foot room, that has curtains drapped on three walls for acoustics. And now im broke. Then I decieded to quit my job cause it was pissing me off... and i still have to pay the rent.......

But im enjoying myself!! :D

If I were to upload two short demo files of the guitar recordings... would someone care to share an opinion... i know theyll mostly suk.. but i still do with some experienced opinion.

thanks a ton
Sidhu

omaru Thu, 04/07/2005 - 06:01

Sidhu wrote:

But im enjoying myself!! :D

If I were to upload two short demo files of the guitar recordings... would someone care to share an opinion... i know theyll mostly suk.. but i still do with some experienced opinion.

thanks a ton
Sidhu

But im enjoying myself!! :D

must be -the- most important thing we can do with our lives.
As well as our need to be responsible.

Mmmm - balance

Nice words - I'd like some more of it

Sidhu Thu, 04/07/2005 - 11:01

yeah omaru.. thats the idea, is not it..??? :)

so i tried to work Kurt's suggestion out today. Surprise! Excellent results. A very natural sounding guitar, just like id like it Though this took me asking the guitarist to change his playing technique a little. Emphasize the higher strings a little more. He was competent. Also that his playing style complemented the music they were recording (heavy, so the guitar was not nice and subttle, but energised). This sound however, was achieved after a little EQ (removing a bit of the boxiness and a little of the high mids, a bit of a high shelf boost, three bands in use).

MC012 stereo pair into a Behringer UB mixer.

Initially i found the bridge mic to be very clangy, his modifying his playing style, and the EQ got me there. Also, the played with his fingers, no pick. I try again monday with a band whose guitarist plas with a pik. (i make him use a soft one)

thanks again

Sidhu

edit : this post was actually meant for another thread... but what the hek!

anonymous Thu, 04/07/2005 - 13:18

JeffSanders wrote: Has anyone used the HM-1 on acoustic guitars with exceptional results?
My sdc is an Audio Technica Pro37r, and I find myself reaching for the ldc (AT 4047sv) 90% of the time...would love to find a better sdc for acoustics for a reasonable price like this.

i just purchased an hm1 for use on acoustic guitar. i'm still waiting for it to show. i'll let you know asap what i think.

ftr, i've been using an at2020 for acoustic (and just about everything else) and am pretty much expecting anything i get to be better.

anonymous Thu, 04/07/2005 - 14:23

JeffSanders wrote: Has anyone used the HM-1 on acoustic guitars with exceptional results?
My sdc is an Audio Technica Pro37r, and I find myself reaching for the ldc (AT 4047sv) 90% of the time...would love to find a better sdc for acoustics for a reasonable price like this.

i just found this link when i googled the hm-1

http://www.motagator.net/play.php?band_id=69&song_id=254&mode=song_hifi

the track is actually called "Guitar Stuff HM-1"

i don't know what it sounds like cuz i can't play m3u files!

anonymous Wed, 04/13/2005 - 11:20

Just wanted to add my praise for the hm1.

I have a matched pair that I use all the time.

- I'm not a great fan of them on vocals, not that they are bad, I just have other mics that I always prefer.

- I like them on accustic (sometimes)

- They are great as drum overheads (especially) when using bright cymbals.

- But they totally exel (IMHO) on things like mandolin, dobro and banjo.

I bought these mics just before starting a bluegrass recording, and I don't know what I would have done without them. After the first time the mandolin player used them, he refused to use anything else, even when I was throwing up mics that cost 10x as much.

What these mics do well is give you a nice balanced sound that you don't have to mangle with eq after.

I bought these before the good reviews started coming out, (and with the cheaper price) and it was one of my best investments.

To me its like getting an re15 or 635a, the price - performance things is just out the window.

anonymous Wed, 04/13/2005 - 14:34

KEL HM-1...Kurt's review

I bought one of the HM-1 KEL mics after reading Kurt's original review. After using it for live sound on a crappy sounding Crate & POS distortion pedal, I was impressed, the HM-1 tammed the hissing crappiness & actually brought forth some usefull defination.....after using it the next week on an accomplished slide/blues player through a really nice 1965 Deluxe Reverb, I was shocked at the RICH QUALITY brought forth by this inexpensive little mic(I had used an SM57 on the same rig the night before & it sounded thin & iritating on slide guitar). I have since ordered another one....crappy sounding Crates do generally come to me in pairs!!!! This mic does seem to enhance the sound of any guitar amp I put it on.....I am amazed & happy that I now own two!!!!
Thanks Kurt for the heads up on an affordable solution to the crappy guitar sound blues!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

x

User login