Moulton Laboratories :: Eight Vocal Microphones Tested and Compared

Finally, for a far more detailed description of “how the mics sound,” read the comments below. They are a rich source of information, and even without hearing the recordings for yourself, you can get a good sense of what the listeners heard.

Listeners’ Comments (Listeners identified as 1 - 9)

I included all comments from all listeners except some comments about noise, which in all fairness could not be attributed to the microphones. No single comment is fully representative of quality or character – the real picture lies in the collective impression. Each column represents a listener and each row is a specific trial using a given singer and material.

If our listeners seem hard on the mics, keep in mind that (a) they were comparing against the original sounds and (b) they were critically searching for attributes (mostly flaws) which would distinguish one microphone from another. This is hard, fatiguing work, and often accentuates negative qualities. What the comments do reveal to you is a lot about the mics’ individual character, timbral strengths and weaknesses.

AKG 3000

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Can't tell between (AKG and Senn-heiser).	A little bottomy, top end smooth	good clean sound	Most accurate in voice but slightly dull.	Accurate. Can't distinguish from (Senn-heiser)	Pretty close to original except for top end - would probably try placement change.	I like it. Smooth. Good bottom. Something missing in top end, no airiness.	Mids a little thin	Nasal, but good lows and mids
a little bit more highs	peak at 2K, a touch nasal, dip @ 400, distant	clean sound	warmer than (Shure). Added highs for clarity.	clean, more accurate	dip in upper mids relative to live vocal. strange coloration	Lacks bottom	muffled lows thin high-mids	Nasal
less highs. OK	peaky @ 2k thin below 500	[no comment]	boosted 10-12k it seems. Sibilant but good.	accurate, clear, but not preferred on this vocal	still strange coloration, sounds good on this vocalist	Upper mid emphasis, but smooth sounding.	thin	fairly flat
OK	bottom weak. peak @ 3-5K	[no comment]	Clear in lows and highs. Sounds like mids have been dropped.	accurate, clear	prominent rise in mids	Funny emphasis of 8-10 KHz. Spitty, midrangy. No warmth.	thin, too much emphasis on high-mids	good frequency response
[no comment]	peaky @ 2K, rolled off above 6K	[no comment]	thin, smallish. Missing some mids	[no comment]	Bandwidth limited, tailored freq. response - changes according to vocal timbre	little lack of lows. missing magic airiness. good sound, but not convincing	[no comment]	slight peak at highs

Audio-Technica 4033

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Good sound. Decent mixture of lows, mids & highs.	Spitty @ 8K. Foggy. 700 Hz. peak.	clear sounding	Good high end, but lacking some bass	More treble. Clean and clear. Preferred over (AT)	All around best, but leans toward sibilance - would probably juggle placement.	Nice! Good frequency response.	slight emphasis on the low midrange, but clear and clean	Proximity effect overwhelms
good represen-tation	top end boosted smoothly	clean sound, not as loud as (Shure)	warm. Even. OK.	warm, clean	High frequency sibilance, nice balance of low mids to highs. Dip in upper mids compared to live.	Great! Bright and full. Flattering and natural sounding.	[no comment]	Nasal and midrangy
vox are in front, close to original	rolloff below 500, a bit of peak @ 8K	[no comment]	accented hi mids. loss of lows	brighter, lacks low punch	lacks low end and some low mids compared to original	Great transients. Maybe too bright but I like it.	a little brighter than original	very accurate repro-duction
good represen-tation	Peaky @ 600, shrouded 3-5 K	[no comment]	Most accurate for this voice. Smooth.	warmer	mid dip, doesn’t sound like singer, but pleasing	I like this mic best! I want one. I want a matched pair!	adds thickness to his voice	peaks and dips

Audix OM-3xb

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Lot of highs, good sound, I can understand all the words, not muffled.	Bright. Peak @ 6K, dip @300. Breathy, a little harsh	loud	clear, quite accurate.	Very clean and clear	sounds closest to live vocal, but less preferable.	Brighter, thinner, less smooth than real voice, but good	Warmth of singers voice was missing. Very thin sound - tinny.	Pretty realistic
Sounds close to the live voice. Good mic for the voice	A little nasal		Maybe too clear. Not enough warmth.	Nice midrange and highs.	Still sounds closest to live vocal.	Bright. Brittle? A little spitty.	slightly tinny	Breathy, but good repro-duction
High heavy	Very bright. Roll off below 300.	vocals are loud	Thin. No low.	Too bright, not enough midrange	Slightly more forward in upper mids than original.	Thin! Spitty, very thin!! Brittle.	very thin sound	Similar to (Bruel and Kjaer), snare and ride sound accurate to original
Louder. A lot of highs. Sounds Like actual voice.	A little screechy, less than I expected.	loud compared to (AKG)	Even distribution of lows and highs.	Warm, prefer this one on this vocal best. Not too bright.	Again, sounds close to original, but would probably opt for something warmer in recording.	Harsh, but cuts through mix. Sounds better than any other.	Bright but fair repre-sentation of his voice	OK

Beyerdynamic 834

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Low heavy, compared to others	Good bottom. Spitty @ 10K, a little dull @ 6K	[no comment]	Good low end. A little boomy.	Most accurate.	More low end than original, but has good impact and close mid to highs.	Warm	Added a lot of low end	Boomy low end. Distortion not clear.
Can't tell between (AKG) and (Senn-heiser).	A bit dull at 4-6 K. Maybe peak at 300	[no comment]	Good lows, but lacking crispy highs.	Warmer, not enough highs	No mid range.	Dull. No bottom.	Sounds similar to (Senn-heiser), a little muffled in low end	Nothing above 10K
even less highs, close to actual live voice	slight peak @ 1.5k, good from 3k up	[no comment]	Clear but maybe too much mids	too warm	dip in mids	A little lacking in consonants and frequencies above. Dull.	[no comment]	peaks and dips, not clear
Low heavy	good bottom, whole top end down	[no comment]	Very accurate repre-sentation. Evenly distributed.	lacks lows	mid dip not as severe as (Neumann), slight presence make mic sound well balanced, but not like singer	Sounds like sung through think pop filter. Not as dull as (Neumann) though.	[no comment]	proximity effect? Mid-rangy
good repre-sentation	top end good, bottom fine	[no comment]	good bottom. very clear	very accurate throughout spectrum	very "hi-fi" - dip in lower mids sounds very pleasing but not accurate	too much lower mids and upper lows. Nice top.	[no comment]	very accurate repro-duction

Bruel & Kjaer 4011

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
OK. Not much better than (Neumann). Has a little more highs.	Dull. 3K dip. Level seems lower because of it.	[no comment]	Dull, muffled	Warm. More midrange	Nice warmth, but slightly muddy.	muffled, dull	A bit unclear - slightly muffled missing highs.	lows are rolled off
High heavy. Not good	dull again. a bit hot @ 10K	[no comment]	Mids are unclear and muffled	Like this mic more on a cappella than with music bed mix. Warmest of the four under test	Muddy, lifeless.	Muffled, sounds com-pressed.	muffled - too much emphasis around 200 Hz.	missing areas of singer's frequency range?
Can hear all instruments fairly well.	Overall OK, top end a little ragged	clear sound	Fairly accurate to the original material	Accurate	Aside from upper mids, sounds very close.	Definitely muffled. No high highs.	emphasis on low end but fair repre-sentation of mids and highs	cymbals much more prominent than (Beyer)
sounds com-pressed	Very dull, no top	better sound than (Neumann), not as cloudy	loss of mids and highs	too warm	Muddy, doesn't sound like singer	very muffled. cloudy low mids	Her breathing was empha-sized by this mic	Peak in mids
OK	dull, words hard to distinguish	[no comment]	loss of lows, but sounds okay	warm	nice presence - not audible on live vocal but good for recording	Boxy		Distortion. Raspier than his voice really is.
ok, closer to voice	maybe peak @ 1K, dip @ 4K	[no comment]	most accurate. Even distri-bution.	warm	very slight low-mid rise, sounds most natural	Com-pressed, dull.	low midrange too pro-nounced, not enough high end	similar to (AKG)

Neumann TLM 193

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Lot of low end. Not a lot of highs. Muffled.	Duller. 3K dip. low apparent level. words un-intelligible.	[no comment]	No brightness, not as loud as (the B&K)	[no comment]	[no comment]	Midrangy, honky, high end better than (Bruel and Kjaer)	Sounded muffled "hand over the mouth" syndrome.	Midrange too much
sounds com-pressed, more lows here	lacks presence & trans-potency. a little 400 Hz peak	cloudy sounding	some loss around 8-10k	[no comment]	not bad for recording, doesn’t sound much like singer (dip in mids)	smooth, easy on the ears. Lacks top.	muffled	Nasal
com-pressed, lows are out front	no presence. bottom definitely boosted	[no comment]	no life in the highs	too much midrange	dip in mids	Listenable, smooth, no airiness, No warmth, a little dull	muffled	Very midrangy, nothing above 10K
sounds com-pressed!	peak @ 600, bottom end good, dip @ 2-4K	sounds cloudy	Took away Robins good low end. Thin!	lacks some highs, too warm	dip in mids	Thin. No bottom! Dull, muffled. Blurry top end.	muffled	high end rolloff about 6k
no difference between mic and original	solid bottom, maybe a bit tubby. dip @ 4-5K	[no comment]	good bottom. warm all around.	warmer	pretty good - sounds very close to original	Good full range. A little lacking in highs. Vocal and bass sound nice. Percussion sounds weak.	muffled, added low end	sounds like a boom-box

Sennheiser MKE 4032

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Less highs than (Shure), but better sound.	Peaky @ 2K? Maybe down at 12K.	good sound	Very clear mids and highs. Some low end.	Bright	Nice balance of mic coloration to natural sound, again placement would probably tip balance either way.	Smooth. Top end sounds good.	bright in the mid-range, a little harsh	Noisy
[no comment]	400 Hz peak. Singer seems distant. Spitty, though dull across top end	[no comment]	Pretty good. l Could use a little brightness.	Accurate.	This mic has a coloration in midrange, sounds a little like comb filtering.	A little grainy. Midrange problem? Sounds very good. Is listenable.	A little harsh	Slight peak somewhere in upper mids
Good	[no comment]	[no comment]	Clear good low mids. Very little bottom. Good highs.	accurate, bright, clear, prefer this over (AKG) on this vocal	high end peak, lower mid dip. closest to vocalist but not accurate	Smoother than (Neumann or AKG). Good accurate top and bottom	-a lot of room picked up	OK frequency response
lacking in lows	whole bottom gone, peaky 3-4K	[no comment]	clear ion the highs, but missing lows.	too bright	narrow peak in upper mids, rolloff in lower mids to low	No bottom./ Weak transients.	thin	snare is too prominent and distorted, otherwise flat
[no comment]	No body (dip below 500), 3K peak, top end ragged	[no comment]	Warm. Maybe too many mids.	muffled	very narrow, but closest to live vocalist in the midrange	Beautiful full range. Some missing highs above 12 KHz.	[no comment]	good bottom, perhaps more than original singer

Shure SM58

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
High heavy, but not as much as (B&K)	neutral but uninterest-ing. Maybe 1K peak.	[no comment]	Sounds like 10K is boosted. Not clear in the lows	Emphasis of breaths was too audible	No top, no bottom.	Full and bright.	good presence	did not capture nuances that (Audio-Technica) did
Poor sound. Missing lows.	peaky at 4-5K, low end thin	vocals are loud	Low end dropped. Mids boosted.	Too bright	(Is this an) SM57? No top, no bottom.	Lacks bottom. Spitty.	fair represen-tation of original re-cording but thins it out a little	No lows, too much highs
a bit more mid here	slight peak at 8K	not as clean as (AKG)	smooth, even, warm	[no comment]	closest to singer	Muffled. No highs, now lows	a little thin, mids stick out (500)	Sounds almost muffled
highs heavy (and louder)	Bright (is this the same D?) Peaky 6-8K	loud but clean sound	thin, disturbing brightness.	warmer, clearer, like this the best of these 4 mics (B&K, Neumann, Audio-Technica are others)	closest to singer, though a bit more forward in upper mids	Nice and bright. Would cut through the mix well.	slightly thin	Almost flat - good, clean, clear
high heavy	too guttural- ringy 4-5 k	[no comment]	Again, thin, too many highs, too bright.	[no comment]	peak in upper mids	Bright, sizzly. Unnaturally harsh, even in the track	bright and thin	rolloff in low end, but otherwise good
OK	spitty, hollow and distant pushy @ 300	[no comment]	boost in mids. no lows.	muffled	lacks brightness of live vocal, but sounds well balanced overall. Added presence.	sounds like being sung through pop filter. No good highs	[no comment]	didn't capture dynamics as well as others

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Login | Register

More Info

Mailing List