Skip to main content

AT4047 Users

Member for

21 years 2 months
I recently got one of these and love it! I was wodering about the high pass filter. My songs are usually real sparse (single guitar track, vocal, maybe a mandolin or harmonica) The filter on this guy is very low, and I'm curious if you all use it when tracking...
1. Vocals
2. Finger picked acoustic guitar
3. Stummed acoustic guitar
...and thank you for your replys

Comments

Member for

21 years 2 months

Pro Audio Guest Thu, 03/10/2005 - 20:20
Hey Minker,

You do realize you have now effectively alerted the entire internet to your new purchase, right? :wink:

The filter on this guy is very low

Are you implying that the filter is lower than on other mics? It's not. It's pretty much the same as the high pass on any other mic that has one. Generally speaking, I don't use a high-pass while recording, unless it's an extreme case. If I were you, I wouldn't use it while recording, especially since the music, like you say, is sparse.

Bet heck, you have it now, try it both ways and see which way you think sounds better.

Member for

17 years 10 months

jonyoung Fri, 03/11/2005 - 07:33
I own a 4050 and will use the high pass filter when needed, typically to help reduce explosives on vocals, or eliminate background noise from HVAC, distant traffic, etc....It really depends on whether you have to capture critical low end signal or not, like the bottom register of a grand piano. For acoustic guitar and vocals, there usually isn't much or any useful info below the filter rollof frequency.

Member for

21 years 2 months

Pro Audio Guest Fri, 03/11/2005 - 12:39
Thank you jonyoung--Intresting to know what others do. I'm glad to avoid unnecessary rumble and noise, but sometimes feel like I also my be sacrificing some subtle "fullness"

Erick, your reply is confusung to me, I'll explain...

1. I think in every post and reply in this forum the writer admits to owning some piece of gear. You yourself admitted to owning a 4047 one or more times, so doesn't the entire internet know about both of us now? Confusing!

2. People asking people advice and opinions on the use of their gear seems to make up a large part of recording forums. A major componant of a forum is people interacting with other people. For you to suggest flipping a switch back and forth and to decide for myself seems sarcastic to me. Why not just write "Decide For Yourself" on the homepage of this websight and skip the forum part?

3. I also own a C1 and a couple of B-5's (more info. for the world) &
here's some high pass specs...
C1-6db at 150 hz
B5-6db at 150 again (these are my only prior lo cut experiences)
And even though most AT mics are descibed as 12 db per octave at 80hz, the graffs show..
AT4033 starting above 150 and hitting 6db aroun 90hz
AT4047 starting around 100 and hitting 6db around 50hz!!!Seems lower then the others.

When I first got the mic I could hardly notice the high pass on my voc. I called AT, and in their own words, "The 4047 has a very low high pass filter because it was designed for applications other than vocs, like bass cabinets and (I think he said kick drums)

No disrespect intended erick. I'm just learning and new to this forum, thats why I'm asking and not answering.
Any way, I (and the whole internet) know you have one too. I would be interested to hear your reply (assuming you include some information this time)

Member for

21 years 2 months

Pro Audio Guest Fri, 03/11/2005 - 13:44
Minker wrote:
1. I think in every post and reply in this forum the writer admits to owning some piece of gear. You yourself admitted to owning a 4047 one or more times, so doesn't the entire internet know about both of us now? Confusing!

Minker, I was making an off the cuff remark in reference to your posting similar questions/announcements over several different forums. I also found it somewhat amusing that you were worried that the mic did not come packaged with a silica gel pack. I'm sorry, I should just let you run with it.


2. People asking people advice and opinions on the use of their gear seems to make up a large part of recording forums. A major componant of a forum is people interacting with other people. For you to suggest flipping a switch back and forth and to decide for myself seems sarcastic to me. Why not just write "Decide For Yourself" on the homepage of this websight and skip the forum part?

There are so many variables that are only pertinent to your situation. No one else on this forum has recorded your voice or your guitar. All voices and instruments interact differently with all mics. I was not being sarcastic when I suggested you try it both ways yourself. That is what I believe you should be doing. What I, or anyone else thinks you should do is not going to help you. We are not there and able to listen. Listening is the best thing you can do.

8-)

Member for

16 years 9 months

moonbaby Fri, 03/11/2005 - 14:29
I own a 4047 and love it! I am planning on getting a 2nd one, along with a K2, instad of the Lawson AIR mic I had been lusting for.I figure that the $1K I would have spent on the AIR alone could be put to better uses.
Anyway, I was told by A-T when I bought my 1st 4047 that the HPF was down -12db at..25Hz.!!!! It was done that way to minimize rumble frequencies without introducing phase shift into the audio-band. I believe that the smoothness of the mic's sound bears this out. I have only one wish...2 diaphrgms, why not multiple patterns? They didn't see it that way....

Member for

21 years 2 months

Pro Audio Guest Fri, 03/11/2005 - 18:14
Yeh moonbaby--the high pass is lower than I'm used to. It really does do a job on rumbles though. Occasionally a big truck or plane manages to join in with me in my recording room, and that filter realy snuffs it out!! But I do notice the loss of some of those lows in my voice.

Erick--your off the cuff remark is no longer confusing. And I do appreciate your expert advice. I was worried bout posting in different forums (got a thread on cross posting going over at HR for that reason.) I've spent months lurking without joining these forums, but my missing silica (just a funny way of discribing my concern that I got a used mic) finally prompted me to join and ask. This forum has alot of 4047 comments posted by J.Stafford and I was hoping he'd reply. I'm embarresed to have taken your first post the wrong way (read before you rant!) so I'm not going to reply in this post anymore---just let 'er die!!

Member for

17 years 1 month

John Stafford Sat, 03/12/2005 - 07:57
Minker wrote:

This forum has alot of 4047 comments posted by J.Stafford and I was hoping he'd reply.

First off I'm flattered by the above :lol: but I'm afraid I'm no expert!

I like my 4047 a lot, but I initially didn't like the filter because I found it wasn't transparent enough, but now I try it on every source to see which setting I prefer. The filter changes the sound in a way that can be quite nice, and I find it has an effect on the mids as well. Some other people have said the same thing, and I'm wondering if it varies from mic to mic, although AT mics tend to be farily well matched.

I rarely record acoustic guitar, but I imagine the 4047 could be a little boomy up close, but of course moving it back from the source can cause problems if your room isn't perfect. Have you come across the http:// ? There's a lovely guitar recording using a 4047, which reminds me of the guitar sound on some recordings from the 70s. In the shootout, in shows what a great mic this can be.

As a vocal mic I never use the filter except when it's not possible to do another take if a heavy truck passes by. I happen to have an unbranded mic stand that for some reason cuts out rumbles. It could be that it wobbles a lot because it's so cheap, and becomes a shockmout in its own right! As far as pops are concerned, I never use a filter on any mic to prevent these, but I use the mic overhead and at an angle, so it's pointed at the mouth and the rush of air passes underneath it. For close vocal mic'ing, I use a pop screen, but given that the HF rolloff sets in earlier than on many other mics, the loss of highs caused by the filter can be more noticeable. Many people on this site have recommended the Stedman filter, but I just got an Oktava filter that I find far superior to my old one -which was really bad.

I got an AT4060 a while back and it's wonderful. I neglected my 4047 for a while as I got to know my new toy a little better, but since I've started using the 4047 again, I love the 'roundness' of the tone.

I'm beginning to ramble here, so to answer your original question, I never use the filter when tracking except when I like the changes it makes to the overall tone, given that I happen to believe it changes the transparency.

Cheers
John

Member for

21 years 2 months

Pro Audio Guest Sat, 03/12/2005 - 13:18
Thanks for your reply John, I was "fishing" for you when I posted here. Since the 4047 was suggested to me, I began a search for opinions on it and you had mentioned it many times. I made a couple hit and miss purchases in the search for a darker mic, but I gotta say I'm finally satisfied (good news for the wife!) One way I tested the filters effect was just holding a vocal note and switching it on and off. It definately changed the tone (seemed to sound more full with the filter on) and I remembered seeing a post where you mentioned some possible sonic changes caused by the filter. AT now has some new user support department and the guy there said this was because the reduction of low frequncies causes the illusion that the rest of the frequencies are boosted. Sounds right. On the other hand, I've recorded some tracks both ways, and the filtered tracks seem thinner. Since I posted this question (at a few websights) I've been advised to keep it on, and to keep it off. I've decided to just keep it in the middle!! Seriously, I just keep it off if I can (gimmie all those sounds) unless there's a problem. Thanks again for your reply.
x