The AT4060

Audio-Technica has emerged over the past decade as a serious manufacturer of high-quality studio microphones. Their studio niche might be described as “good mics for not a whole lot of money,” and they have acquired a lot of loyal users who need good microphones but can’t afford to shell out for the latest, hottest Neumann, Schoeps or B&K. To the extent that the studio biz is a boutique biz, where BRAND IS THE PRIMARY DETERMINANT OF QUALITY, Audio-Technica microphones haven’t achieved a great deal of what Rodney Dangerfield would call “respect,” regardless of their actual performance. However, for those of us who labor away in project studios of all sizes and shapes, where impressing prospective clients is often of much lower priority, Audio-Technica provides some solid basic studio workhorse microphones, at very reasonable cost. I’m very fond, for instance, of the multi-pattern AT4050 condenser microphones, and happily use them for just about everything, from voice-overs to location classical recordings. I also have a lovely pair of AT853 lavalier electret condensers that are great-sounding problem solvers.

The new AT4060 represents a step up for Audio-Technica in terms of price point and perceived audio quality. A vacuum-tube-type single-pattern dual-diaphragm cardioid condenser, the microphone can be distinguished by its high-quality materials, construction and audio performance. It isn’t cheap, at $1600, but it isn’t at all shabby either, if you know what I mean. There’s a lot here. To my way of thinking, you don’t have to be at all ashamed to hang one or two of these out over your favorite Bosendorfer 9-foot grand piano.

For your 1.6 big ones, you get the mic, of course, plus a really nice shock mount that is a significant improvement over AT’s 4050 shock mount, a special 10-meter 6-pin cable that runs from the mic to a power supply, the power supply itself (tubes require a much higher voltage power supply than solid state components, usually several hundred volts, and 48V DC phantom power from a console just isn’t adequate), rack-mounting ears and, happily, an AC power cord. Options include a windscreen, extension cables in a variety of lengths, and a solid mic stand clamp. Build quality appears to be excellent, and the packaging is very nice, but without ostentation (no curly teak mic boxes by Gucci, fr’instance).

A Little About Cardioid ‘n Tube Microphones

Cardioid microphones, as we all know, are directional in their pickup, which is to say that the output amplitude of the mic varies as a function of the angle of arrival of acoustic energy. One of the key problems with cardioids is, of course, that the directional pattern (AKA “polar response”) varies as a function of frequency. This means that, assuming on-axis response is flat, off-axis sounds will have degraded frequency response. As a result, there are many situations where cardioid mics present serious miking problems that can only be avoided with by use of omnidirectional and bi-directional (“figure-8”) mics, which in turn present other problems, of course. Personally, I think we have become overly dependent on cardioid mics in studio work, for this very reason, and over the years, therefore, I’ve increasingly looked to omnis to solve many of my miking problems. Nonetheless, cardioids are the default choice for studio work, and it is virtually impossible to get along without them for pop multitrack work.

So, a key feature of cardioid mics is off-axis response. We want the off-axis sounds to have the same timbre as the on-axis sounds, only softer. Instead of desiring to not hear high-frequency room stuff, what we really don’t want to hear are room reflections! We’d like to NOT HEAR other sound sources as well, but that is just about impossible if they are nearby and at all loud. If we’re lucky and careful with our mic placement, we can get the cardioid pattern to reduce the DIRECT sound from other sources by 5-10 dB. Which is good as far as it goes, but doesn’t solve issues of leakage and isolation very much at all.

To the extent that their frequency response doesn’t change for off-axis sounds, cardioid mics can be effectively used in complex situations that involve picking up multiple acoustic sources, or where you’d like to move the microphone away from the instrument for better or more realistic sound quality, while not adding significant room tone to the sound. This is a major part of why drum miking is so difficult and confounding.

Meanwhile, tube mics have their own idiosyncrasies to worry about. Using tubes for the primary amplifier stage in a condenser mic is how condenser mics were originally designed, and in our fascination with retro hardware we have come to embrace such tube amplification circuits as being “richer,” “warmer,” “fatter,” etc., just like they were, or so we’re told, in the good ol’ days. Such performance attributes are usually explained as being due to the “non-linearity” of tube circuit performance, and to a preponderance of 2nd harmonic distortion components and other “even harmonic components”, which are sometimes touted as “good” distortion, because they are less audible, dissonant and harsh than third harmonic and other “odd harmonic” distortion components. Yada yada. Sounds like another marketing ploy, right?

Well, actually, just so you know that I’m not totally immune to such half-baked mythology, I’ve gotta tell you that my prized favorite personal mic is an elderly Schoeps tube condenser from the ‘50s, which continues to dazzle me with its brilliant hi-rez performance. Warmer? Yup. More transparent? Yup. Great resolution? Yup. I have no idea about its linearity, but it sure sounds great!

Sadly, though, tubes ain’t perfect. Older tube mics (including mine) present noise and humidity problems, require long warm-ups, are fragile, and suffer from variable performance as the tubes age. I am terrified to depend on such mics on location in high humidity conditions, particularly when I can’t leave them on for six hours or more before I need to start using them. In short, they’re touchy critters, they’re expensive and they want plenty o’ TLC. You had to know there was a reason we went to solid state and smaller diaphragms, as well as electret mechanisms, well, didn’t you?