Skip to main content

Hi folks. It is my first post here. I have been hanging out on other audio engineering forums for many years but this forum looks friendly and non-elitist so I decided to sign up.

I am planning on buying a Miktek MK300. My main mic is an AT4033 which is nice but a little sibilant and lacking high frequencies. There is a signature peak at 5khz and a drop at 10khz. I wanted something a little smoother sounding for vocals and acoustic guitars. I also like the different polar patterns. Does anyone have any experience with this microphone?


pcrecord Thu, 11/24/2016 - 06:51

Hey welcome Num6 !

What preamp are you using with the 4033 ? They are not among those commonly named as sibilant...
Also how far are you from the mic ?
Did you try to turn it 5-10-15 degrees. Being a bit off-axis often helps.
Could you post a raw track made with it ?

The miktek is said to be a nice mic but I doubt it would be less sibilant for you because it shares the same bump in the 5-10k area (at least on paper)

Boswell Thu, 11/24/2016 - 09:53

At almost the same price as the MK300 is the Rode NT2-A. Because the NT2-A's response is smoother in the higher frequencies than the MK300, it takes EQ better, and a 2-3dB broad cut centered around 7KHz gives an almost flat response to 15KHz when in cardioid pattern.

The MK300 is a nice mic, but if your budget will stretch a little higher, there are many more multi-pattern mics to take a look at before grabbing that one.

numero6 Thu, 11/24/2016 - 12:36

pcrecord, thank you for your welcome! I use a Summit Audio 2ba221 tube preamp into a Focusrite Forte interface. Honestly I do like the 4033 but I just wanted a different flavor mic especially to record guitars (Larrivee OM3, Takamine EF341, Cordoba GK Studio, Various dobros, banjos and Lapsteels).

I might just wait to have more dough and get a used C414 XLS II which I used years ago when I was doing studio work (it was most lilely a C414B). I never used the AT4050 but it is known to have a flatter and brighter response and it is multi-pattern too. I think it would also be in line with what I need and you find them used on EBAY for less than $400.

@BoswelI have never considered a Rode NT2-A but it is a good idea actually, I'll look into it.

This Miktek seemed interesting and is pretty well priced that is why I was considering it but very few people have used it and I don't want to be the ome taking the bullet and I guess it does not have such a flat frequency response either.

I'll try to post some of my stuff when I get a moment.. It is in the spirit of Manu Chao, acoustic Reggae...

numero6 Thu, 11/24/2016 - 15:18

pcrecord, post: 443722, member: 46460 wrote: BTW, the sad part of using the Focusrite Forte with an external preamp is that the inboard preamps can't be bypassed if I remember..

Actually you can bypass the preamp on on the Forte and go directly "line level". My set up actually sound really good, it is simple but I really love it.

Back to the mic thing I think you guys help me decide on getting an AT4050

numero6 Fri, 12/09/2016 - 12:53

After doing a little soul searching I came to the conclusion that if the AT4033 was just fine with my vocals, I really cared about getting the perfect mic to record my guirars and other acoustic instruments. I bought a (used) SDC AKG C451b which does wonders for this purpose. I own a C1000 and I must say the C451b is a way better mic.

Down the road, I am still considering getting a Miktek MK300 to use for Mid-siding along with the AKG. As a budget multi-pattern mic, this Miktek really seem to be a bargain.

numero6 Mon, 09/18/2017 - 21:50

Hi Folks, I thought I would give a little update as I eventually did get a Miktek MK300.
First of all, I think the Sweetwater mic shootout will give you a great idea of the way this mic fares compared to other mics. As Sweetwater's Lindsey described it in some subsequent comments it is "big and warm". Quite a few have mentioned that it punches way above its weight and I would agree with.
I find the Miktek to be perfectly voiced for vocals and not honky, lifeless and sybilant like my AT4033 or harsh and extremely sybilant like my Blue Bluebird. (No offense but that is how I hear those mics. I love the AT4033 on acoustic guitars or as overhead just not as a vocal mic. The shootout actually confirms the way I felt about those mics)
Frequency-wise, the MK300 has this little peak around 7k then drops around 10k (see graph posted above) which makes male vocals fit nicely in the mix with great clarity and no eq whatsoever. It is definitely the right mic for my voice as I previously could never get my vocals to sit without tinkering with the eq for hours, neither with the AT4033 nor the Bluebird. Last but not least, I don't need to use a de-esser anymore.

As you can hear it in the shootout, the MK300 may not have the sweet multi-dimemsional highs of those thousand Dollars microphones but for $299, you can really get some super pro results. In any case, when buried in a busy mix, those super fancy highs (arguably) don't do much for you. Surprisingly, I found its voicing reminiscent to a 414 XLII (listen to the shootout, maybe I am delusional/deaf)
The fact the MK300 is also multi-pattern makes it even more of a bargain since you can use it for a bunch of other applications such as blumenlein, m/s, positioned horizontally in figure 8 and coupled with a SDC to record a singer/guitarist with less bleed into the vocals.
I got some great results using it as "side" in a mid/side recording paired with the AKG C451b for classical guitar recordings. The frequency response in figure 8 seems flatter than in cardioid.
I also used it as a room mic in omni to record an upright piano, it did the job.
The high pass filter cuts at 100Hz which I much prefer over 80Hz for vocals as I feel that it does not require any additional cut when mixing.

Construction-wise, It is heavy and appears well built. The shock mount does the job although It feels a bit cheap (for the price, I don't mind investing later in a more sturdy one). I am pretty stoked!

pcrecord Tue, 09/19/2017 - 08:49

DonnyThompson, post: 452831, member: 46114 wrote: The C1000's are harsh, brittle, with peaky upper mids and a muddy low end

Althought all this is true, I've had acceptable results with them on ride cymbals and some Hi-Hats. (of course it was with good preamps)
Once I got them I used them has Overheads and still would for live application.

DonnyThompson Wed, 09/20/2017 - 01:38

pcrecord, post: 452840, member: 46460 wrote: (y)

I was never a fan of the 737 .., mainly because I felt it to be overpriced. But I didn't think it was a bad preamp. Certainly better than what many "small room" consoles were offering at that time... Tascam, Yamaha, etc.
I just thought it was too much money. And I stand by my statement of the C1000s being a terrible mic - at the time of its release, I considered it to be AKG's "mistake" mic. I still do.
I got better tones on OH's the times I was made to use 57's. If I had to choose today, and I had the options of using 57's or C1000's, I'd still choose the 57's ...all day long and twice on Sundays. ;)
IMHO of course. :)

pcrecord Wed, 09/20/2017 - 04:51

DonnyThompson, post: 452847, member: 46114 wrote: But I didn't think it was a bad preamp.

I never tried it but it's not the first time I read bad press about the 737.
From what I can gather, it's a bit harsh on the highend than other preamp in its class and overpriced.
I heard great results from Avalon on bass but I'm sure a lot of hit vocal tracks were also made with it.
Another thing, maybe the stock tubes are a bit harsh but they can be swapped for warmer ones..
So that's why I want to be carefull and not bash the unit. I would certainly find a use for it if givin one.