Ok guys...so I have a budget of around 300$ for a pair of deccent tom/allaround mics...what do you think is better?
Shure beta56 or Audix D2? they are both in the same price range...but I have no expirince with anyone of them!...
is anyone here exprinced with recording with anyone of them or both?
thanks a lot! :lol:
noam from israel
Comments
Try this Link, it compares the 56 to a couple different audix mi
Try this Link, it compares the 56 to a couple different audix mics, a 57, and a 421. Those 2 mics both sound quite a bit different, so this may help you decide:
http://www.purewaveaudio.com/dmicsamples.php
edit: Oh sorry, it doesnt do the 56, it's the 98. Either way though, it'll give you an idea of how the D2 sounds, and other audix mics.
Your welcome! Like Remy said though, one of the Beta mics, a re
Your welcome! Like Remy said though, one of the Beta mics, a regular 57 or 58 can work well also, and they can be used on many other things. Im not sure how versatile the Audix mics are, but i know people who are happy with them for recording. I have a D6, it's good on a kick, and maybe a bass cab, depending on what sound you want, but i probly wouldnt use it on toms, and most other things. An AKG D-112 though is cheaper, and i would say is alot more versatile then the D6, so that may be the case for the other mics.
I never tried the Audix mics, but the Beta 56s are excellent for
I never tried the Audix mics, but the Beta 56s are excellent for snare and toms, I don't think you will regret buying a pair. Their size and shape also makes them very easy to position round the kit: they are much easier to squeeze under a low-slung cymbal than a '57 style mic (especially once the cable is plugged in) which gives you more freedom to angle the mics to exclude spill...
:)