Skip to main content

hi friends1
I am a big fan of AT mic line. In fact I have three on here, workin fine since 1996, used for orchestras, horn bands, in almost every day job recording section.
I want to buy another mic. what are the differences between at4050 at cardioid and the new :p model at4040 that only does cardioid?
will they function as a couple?


ckevperry Mon, 03/31/2003 - 05:31

I own two 4040's but haven't touched a 4050 for I'm going by memory here Alecio.

I believe the 4040 might have a more even response than the 4050 except that the 4040 has top end peak. The 4050 always seemed thin on most voices.

The 4040's excel....and I do mean EXCEL....on stereo mic'ng situations like choir, overheads and piano. They have a focus and depth that made me sell my km-184's.

anonymous Wed, 04/02/2003 - 11:14

The 4040 has nickel plated brass diaphram, where the 4050 has a dual vapor deposited gold diaphram. So there will be a difference in tone, and the 4050 is not the thinner of the two.

They both have about the same location for the HF bump, and the 4040 does go out to 20kHz.

To my ear, the 4050 is more diverse. I didn't care for the 4040. I do use the 4050, the 4060, the 4047 and the ATM25's.

ckevperry Wed, 04/02/2003 - 13:36

High spl's the 4050 did seem thinner. Neither one is a favorite on voices for me as they both are too thin.

I'm just lovin the 4040's for drum overheads and piano. A drummer I have done many records with lately exclaimed "Wow the drums sound amazing," when I had up the 4040's for the first time. We always got good sounds, but this is the first time he stopped and came in the cr to see what was up. We've previously used 4033's, u87's, km184's, oktava's....

The 4047 is great on kick and some voices. I did use to like the 4050 for airy BGV's where I was gonna end up rolling off low end anyway.