I've worked with hundreds of different 414's over the years, and, I have also occasionally worked with the 214 in some of my clients home "studios".

The 214's not a bad mic, it sounds good for what it is, which is a lower priced LD cardioid condenser.

However, to claim that the only difference between a 214 and a 414 is in the cardioid pattern is not at all accurate.

First off, there are many different models of 414's that have been released over the years - some with different features than others - that can vary in degree from "not much difference" to "big difference".

For example, if we A-B'd a 214 against one of my 1970's 414-EB models - which used the original AKG C12 brass capsule and has since been replaced by Teflon - you'd hear a big difference between the two.

Assuming that both mics are set for cardioid, using the same generally acceptably good mic pre, in a decent sounding room, the 414 EB will have much more warmth in the lows, tightness in the mid-range, and a gorgeous silky presence lift. The 214 will get the job done, but it won't have the same sonics as the 414, especially the EB.

If I were to attempt to compare the 214 to any one 414 model in particular, I guess that I might offer up the possibility that out of all the various 414 models, the 214 probably comes closest to the XL 414...
but, that still doesn't make it an XL 414. ;)

What mic pre are you using?
Don't be fooled into thinking that mic preamp quality is incidental and doesn't matter.... because it does matter indeed.. in fact, it matters big time. ;)

The best mic in the world will only ever sound as good as the preamp that you are using it with allows it to sound. ;)

FWIW

d/

Right on Donny!

I'll second (or I guess third) Donny's thoughts. I own a 214 and have recorded with a couple of 414s. There definitely are similarities, but it is not the cardioid equivalent of either 414 I've used. It's a good mic in its own right, and fairly versatile despite the single pattern. Associating it with the venerable 414 is probably wise marketing on AKG's part.

Thank all. I know it's not as revered as the 414. Just curious of general impressions.

I think everybody's making a bigger deal of the differences of the 214 compared to the numerous various 414's. This is almost a non-conversation and can't really be compared to an actual conversation, yada yada. If you get my drift?

That is to say, if you wanted a 214, for its affordability? Versus a 414? Yeah... go for it. It's a quality microphone. That's all you need to know. And it has sonic similarities to its kissing cousin's of 414's. Which one matches precisely the many different variants of 414's? I believe AKG has already indicated that? As that single cardioid capsule is one of the 2 used within 414's that are currently available.

In our work the discussions are continuous about subtle nuance differences that are less significant than significant. Though there is a small caveat to this. That comes when trying to use the 214 as say, the cardioid front of a 414, figure 8 pattern for MS stereo microphone capture purposes. So it won't necessarily exactly match, by a small nuance of difference, to that of the many 414 type variants released through the years. BFD! I personally wouldn't care and don't. Everything would still work, beautifully add sound fabulous. So you need not really worry as to the differences. It's like the difference between your left pinky fingernail and your right pinky fingernail. Which one is better? Is it better if it's a left nail or a right nail?

Don't bite your fingernails! You need them to repair your equipment.
Mx. Remy Ann David