Anyone tried these? I currently use a Neumann TLM 103 which I like a lot but wish to add a new option. I was considering the BLUE Mouse, but these (RODE NTV or NTK and the SP T3) sound interesting. Or are they a step down from what I'm using. Mostly Male Vocal use.
Comments
The Rode NTK sounds like a slightly more colored TLM103 (less ha
The Rode NTK sounds like a slightly more colored TLM103 (less hard), with a little less proximity effect at the same distance. You really have to be on top of it to get the same exaggerated low boost for voxs. For the price, the NTK can't be beat. The BLUE mouse is very airy up top, and doesn't have a lot of percievable low boost...but for the right voice it works well. I personally like the MBHO 608 more (3 patterns too, instead of just cardiod) for the same cash as the Mouse. The 608 is very natural sounding, and clear (but not in a sterile unexciting way). I was really impressed with the whole MHBO line in general and the great attitude of the guys behind the scenes. YMMV.
The Mouse is cleaner & more focused than than the Rode, I always
The Mouse is cleaner & more focused than than the Rode, I always go to it first for vocalists although have found the Rode to be better on some males. They're not even remotely similar-sounding mics, it'll be worth trying them out yourself but you can't go wrong with either choice (they're my two faves for vocalists out of our whole cabinet). Also, the new Blue Baby Bottle is an interesting mic, it's got more meatiness with none of the brilliance of the Mouse, tons of character on that one.
I've been planning on A/B'ing the Studio Projects against the Mouse, I'll let you know how it goes.
Originally posted by coldsnow: Nathan, what is MBHO? MBHO is a
Originally posted by coldsnow:
Nathan, what is MBHO?
MBHO is a German mic manufacturer that handcrafts their microphones. The capsule used in the MBHO 608 "Lollypop" is also used in the Brauner and Soundelux ELUX 251. Mr. Haun, the owner of MBHO worked for Beyer and Mr Schneider the head engineer was with Schoeps for many years. (Strong lineage huh? :) ). Their mics sound very open and clear, and I find them extremely musical sounding (the freq range is very balanced from bottom to top, very much how my ears hear things...and within the confines of each polar pattern's natural characteristics). The Lollypop, like I said in the above post is the same price as a BLUE Mouse, and I find it to be clearly (pun intended) superior sonically (not as unnaturally crispy as the Mouse, with more natural sounding low mids) for most applications. For instance, I would never use a Mouse on a guitar amp or drum room (far too bright for that application), an MBHO 608 excells at both in addition to most anything else. I hope this helps.
Originally posted by coldsnow: More low mid, the 103 has enough
Originally posted by coldsnow:
More low mid, the 103 has enough presence, but a nice change of pace would be a powerful mid mic.
The two mics that pop into my mind are the AT4047 and Soundelux U195. Both are based on the U47Fet and are thicker sounding then the TLM103. If one doesn't work then the other usually does. The 414B/ULS also has a thicker low mid but it usually sounds woolly. That's usually the one that looses the mic shootout for vocals though.
FWIW: I read such a raving review in one of the rags about the B
FWIW: I read such a raving review in one of the rags about the BLUE Mouse that when i saw one for $1000 i bought it "sound unheard". Maybe it's just my particular one, but i think the TLM 103 blows it away. It's a little too crispy in the high end for me, and a little lax on the bottom, and also seems to be very finicky about it's phantom power - but then again, maybe there 's just something wrong with my particular mic. I haven't gotten around to borrowing another one to compare. At this point, I'd gladly trade it for another 103.