#974324 - 03/14/00 04:44 AM
Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
Offline
|
|
Hey Ed
Have you anything to say about the Marshall Electronics 2001-P microphone? A record producer / pal of mine says he holds it up to the Neuman and others! The Marshall sells for $160 ... is it possible that it could deliver as much presence as a Neuman or a Blue mic?
I'm gonna be cutting a new CD project at home this year, using the Roland (maybe the Korg) digital 16-track studio ... I need mics and preamps and knowledge about both ... I play acoustic 6-string, use open tunings, I like my vocals and guitar right in yer face. I want to mic my vocal & guitar live, and I want to use GREAT mics, ya know?
THANKS!
------------------
pax,
Alan
http://AlanHorvath.com
...................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974325 - 03/15/00 06:15 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Ed Cherney
Gold Member
Registered: 02/11/00
Posts: 547
Loc: Venice, Ca.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well,
You get what you pay for (OK, not always). You just have to listen and decide if it's giving you anything good.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974326 - 03/15/00 06:50 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Mr. G
Senior Member
Registered: 01/25/00
Posts: 191
Loc: Fort Wayne, IN
|
|
Offline
|
|
As good luck would have it, there's a review of the Marshall MXL2001-P and MXL2003 in the March '00 issue of EQ magazine, which should be getting out to subscribers and newsstands as I write this.
Definitely give the article a look, it should tell you what you need to know.
------------------
Mitch Gallagher
Editor
EQ magazine
_________________________
the poster formerly known as MitchG formerly known as EQ_Editor
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974327 - 03/15/00 07:46 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
So ... I take it you have nothing to say about the mic.
Thanks, Ed.
Hey Mitch!
Thanks for the info ... I'll definitely check it out.
------------------
pax,
Alan
http://AlanHorvath.com
...................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974328 - 03/15/00 07:56 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Ed Cherney
Gold Member
Registered: 02/11/00
Posts: 547
Loc: Venice, Ca.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Sorry, but I have not had a chance to use it...I am a slut for stuff, I'll try to get my hands on 1 or 2, try em out and let you know.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974329 - 03/15/00 08:13 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Ahhh ...
Thank you so much, Ed. I know you must be swamped with this stuff ... but, like I said, my pal is a producer and for him to rant about this mic like he did, I've become more than curious.
Can't wait to read the article in EQ's new issue!
------------------
pax,
Alan
http://AlanHorvath.com
...................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974330 - 04/08/00 05:02 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
We just finished auditioning two of these mics in my studio. No low end, so you can't really compare it to a Nuemann... but it was really nice on acoustic guitar. Very bright and open, you can point it right at the soundhole on a balanced guitar and it sounds super.
But here's the thing about inexpensive... the two mics we listened to were as radically different from each other as they were from the other mics in the booth at the time. One was MUCH louder and brighter than the first. If I was going to buy one, I'd be prepared to exchange a few beofre I got what i wanted.
------------------
Jim Bordner
Gravity Music
"Tunes so heavy, there
oughta be a law."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974331 - 04/08/00 10:13 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks Jim
I appreciate your experience.
Man, I've heard so much bad about these ... and all the other "new" mics coming out ... I've decided to stick with the companies that have been doing it right all along - regardless of price.
If you have any rants about mics you like for vocals (clean, listenable vocals) and mics you like for acoustic guitar, I'd love to hear it!
I've also been trying to glam any possible info about how the Love Mongers (formerly Heart) are producing their acoustic guitar sound - if ANYONE knows ANYTHING ... please!
pax,
Alan Horvath http://AlanHorvath.com
...................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974332 - 04/09/00 01:16 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Doug_dup4
Member
Registered: 12/09/01
Posts: 1
Loc: Pottstown,PA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
These mics got SLAMMED on prorec.com. The review definitely didn't inspire confidence at any price.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974333 - 04/09/00 01:33 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
That may be where I read about how all these companies are jumping on the "bandwagon" and producing mics (for the first time) ... specifically, condensor mics ... and conparing them to Neuman's, etc.
We've all seen them, eh? "Getcher $3000 mic fer $200 Right Here!"
The *right* way to go, I'm thinking, is Sennheizer ... AKG ... for something of superb quality, at around $1000?
pax,
Alan Horvath http://AlanHorvath.com
....................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974334 - 04/09/00 03:20 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
DrDiamond
Member
Registered: 01/06/00
Posts: 16
Loc: Eugene, Oregon, USoA
|
|
Offline
|
|
For around $1,100 you can get TWO Shure KSM-32's. You can't beat that with a stick.
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974335 - 04/09/00 03:53 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks, Doc!
Pretty cool lookin' mic!
http://www.shure.com/ksm32.html
Alan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974336 - 04/09/00 05:44 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Mark Lemaire
Gold Member
Registered: 03/21/00
Posts: 930
Loc: Emeryville, CA USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I was once told that in this ever changing world of audio, there are only a few things that will hold value: A good mic, a good pre, and a good acoustic environment.
If you buy a good enough mic , you will not outgrow it, and it will be a tool you'll use constantly for your whole life. If you go cheap, however, you'll soon be looking for something better, searching for that elusive something...
I don't think the thousand dollar mark is high enough to achieve "escape velocity". The AKG 414 is around this much, has been a standard for years, but I personally don't like it- sounds closed down and small compared to an old Neumann- though I've made whole albums with a 414 as the star mic, and they came out OK.
The new fashion is single pattern mics- usually cardioid. This single pattern will hamper your creativity and your ability to learn. In a live tracking date, fig 8 will help you get seperation. In many overdub dates and most classical dates, omni is an excellent choice. I use cardiod maybe 30% of the time. The different patterns give the buyer more mics for the buck- providing different tones to play with.
I am not wealthy, but I spent what seemed a king's ransom for a pair of Neumann U67s in 1991. They sounded pretty bad (as most old tube mics will) until they were rebuilt and tuned up by Klaus Heyne. Total for the mics and rebuilds- $5700- in '91. This is about half what it would cost today (I know this, as I did it again a year ago).
"Too much!!", you may say, but these mics are the centerpiece of most of the the sounds I get, blowing all others away in almost every circumstance- from pop vocals to full orchestrals to acoustic guitars. A fine investment. At least I know that if the sound I get sucks, I can't blame the mic.
M Lemaire
PS- A quote from Al Schmitt in the current EQ: "I think my all- time favorite mic- for a microphone that does anything- is the (U) 67. I use it on strings, I'm using it on Diana (Krall's) vocals, you can use it on upright bass, you can use it on saxes, trombones, trumpets. To me, it's the most flexible mic made that sounds really good. If I was going to but one mic, that would be the mic I would buy, although now their very expensive. Im sorry I didn't but all those mics for $300-$400 apiece when I had the opportunity!"
PPS: He also loves the (currently made) TLM 103, and the M149. Contradicts himself, too, by saying all he uses are tube mics on dates. The 103 is transistors, the M149 has a tube, but also transistors, and no transformer. Most purists insist that a true tube mic have no transistors, not just the inclusion of a tube somewhere in there...
l
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974337 - 04/09/00 01:01 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Wow.
Now I need a $6000 budget for a mic.
Maybe we should change the subject to "How do you find a Sugar Daddy?"
Thanks Mark ... where do you live? Can I borrow the U67?
Alan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974338 - 04/09/00 04:08 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
SvtYeahBaby!
Senior Member
Registered: 03/25/00
Posts: 93
Loc: Kansas City,MO,USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hey if you have a tight budget, Audio-Technicas 4033 or 4050 are killer.. I don't wanrt to sound like an ad, but although I havent used the Shure, the At is untouchable in it's price as far as I'm concerened.....
------------------
SRS
_________________________
Steve Smith
No, not the drummer
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974339 - 04/10/00 03:46 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks SRS
Of course, you know Mark is absolutely right in what he's saying ... l'll check out the AT's, but I'm still thinkin' Sennheizer ... AKG ...
Alan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974340 - 05/22/00 06:20 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hmm, I've used the TLM-103 a bun h and been verry happy with the results. Though, I also own a Rode NT-2. I've A/B'd them both and The TLM-103 does sound a bit better, but for the money I'de rather buy (2) Nt-2's then (1) TLM-103. I noticed no one had mentioned the Rode nt-2 as an option. Any particular reason? I also own a CAD E-200. Any opinions about that one? I think both the NT-2 and the CAD E-200 are cool mikes for the $$.I know there not a U-87, but there a great deal for the money. Any coments?
Thanks, Eric
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974341 - 05/22/00 09:02 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Jon Atack
Gold Member
Registered: 04/22/00
Posts: 920
Loc: Paris, France
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have to admit I've hard a hard time finding a particular use for the AT4033 in our studio. Ditto for the Oktava MK219s. They all mostly sit in the drawer while the U87s and the 414s do the condenser work and the 421/441s, 57s, RE20, D112 and ATM25s do the dynamic work. I wish we had U67s and U47s, but alas. What do you all find the AT4033 or the MK219s particularly good at?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974342 - 05/22/00 11:45 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hey, Eric ... hey, John ...
Thanks for your replies.
Man, you said it, Jon ... the U87 and the AKG 414 ... everytime my vocals have been cut by the producers I admire most, those were the mics.
I'm an artist and my knowledge here shrinks in comparison to yours' ...
I'm wondering what your prefs are for micing acoustic guitar ... is it a Sennheiser that I always see there? I don't know the model number ... straight (3/4" circum); 4" long ... forgive me.
What about your favorite mic positions? A shoulder-mic can be cool all alone ... though, I've usually used 2 mics -- one at the neck / 9th fret; one at the soundhole -- and for a 3rd, one behind the guitar - bottom end.
------------------
pax,
Alan
http://AlanHorvath.com
...................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974343 - 05/31/00 03:16 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I have two of the Marshalls in question, got em for a song, (groan). They are okay, not the best, but the price is right.
Found them at shreveaudio.com for 179, and at sweetwater.com for 165. i bought them from my locla dealer for 199, the bastards. LOL see ya
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#974344 - 05/31/00 05:45 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
ghostdancer
Member
Registered: 01/24/01
Posts: 0
Loc: Gettysburg,PA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
hey Dasong, they are 149 at that shreveaudio.com, what are you afflicted?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974345 - 05/31/00 06:33 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
Uh Clem
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/13/00
Posts: 3442
Loc: Atlanta, GA USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
My theory is that unless you actually want to spend more in the long haul, re-inventing the wheel is not how to save money or be productive.
Experimentation is fine, but there are some mics that are just known for what they do and so many recordings have been made with them, its what your ear expects to hear.
If you want a pro sound, look and read what pros use and then do that. Start there and save the experimental mics for later.
In the budget range, the Shure KSM32 seems to be bubbling to the top.
Owning an AKG414 is never a bad thing and a pair is better. The mutli-patterns will let you try M-S and other cool tricks.
Look at John Atack's list - those are staples I would work toward owning.
I have a 4050 - it sounded good on this one chic...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974346 - 05/31/00 10:45 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
lwilliam
Senior Member
Registered: 03/17/00
Posts: 497
Loc: Canyon Country, CA, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I saw a post recently on r.a.p. from someone who put together a mic comparison CD which pitted the Marshall mics against the likes of 414s, 57s, Rode NTVs, etc. Don't know if the recording quality is any good, but a search in deja should find the post for you.
(I make nothing from the sale of that CD, BTW).
------------------
Larry W.
_________________________
Larry W.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974347 - 06/01/00 01:00 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hey gang
I've been drooling over the AKG-C414B/TLII "Vintage TL" ... it's a "faithful sonic recreation of the old C12 tube mic ... frequency range: 10Hz - 20Hz ... $1398.00
Gulp.
Any comments?
PS - Why would I want a "matched pair?" What does that mean? Why is it desirable?
8o)
pax,
Alan Horvath http://AlanHorvath.com
........................................
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974348 - 06/01/00 09:47 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
lwilliam
Senior Member
Registered: 03/17/00
Posts: 497
Loc: Canyon Country, CA, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
A "matched pair" means two mic's that have been tested for frequency response and are as close as the manufacturer deems to being identical in that respect. Sometimes they have consectutive serial numbers and sometimes they don't.
If you are doing stereo mic'ing such as drum overheads, choirs, acoustic guitar, piano, etc., you want the frequency response of the two mics to match as closely as possible so that the stereo image is reproduced as faithfully as possible.
------------------
Larry W.
_________________________
Larry W.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974349 - 06/05/00 08:54 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
mp@soundtechrecording.com
Senior Member
Registered: 05/18/00
Posts: 74
Loc: Windsor, ON, Canada
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by horvath:
Hey gang
I've been drooling over the AKG-C414B/TLII "Vintage TL" ... it's a "faithful sonic recreation of the old C12 tube mic ...
The capsule is the part that is the recreation, but most people agree it doesn't come close. The TLII is a transformerless FET microphone, the C12 is a microphone based on the 6072 tube utilizing an output transformer. They will sound nothing alike.
If you're looking for a C12 sound on a budget, seek out a 12a which goes for around 2K or a 414EB (not P48). They both have a real CK12 brass capsule in them and the C12a has a tube in there as well.
Good luck.
Mark Plancke
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974350 - 06/05/00 09:57 PM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
rstroope
Senior Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 64
Loc: Shreveport, LA USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
My 2 cents worth. We work within our budgets and if you can afford an expensive mic..buy it, if not get what works for you. Remember, it's the music not the mic. I've heard good recordings made with SM58's. But I just love hearing about good mic's and someday I hope to own the best but for now the best is what my budget allows. As I start to make money I'll buy better. Works for me. And this thougt didn't cost a dime.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#974351 - 06/06/00 03:42 AM
Re: Marshall 2001-P microphone
|
horvath
Member
Registered: 03/14/00
Posts: 11
Loc: North Brunswick, NJ USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hey Larry
Thanks for the info ... I just read an article in June's Electronic Musician (got one in the mail ... ??) about stereo micing - I'm in love with using the "Jecklin Disk" if you're familiar with it. Swiss Engineer glue lamb's fleece to an old LP and put it between two mics.
What if you did such, and the mics weren't matched pairs? Our ears aren't "matched pairs" are they? I mean, mine LOOK like they are matched, but I bet if I had them tested I'd find my ears aren't "matched pairs!"
Thanks to you, too, Mark. I'm a baritone Folk artist. My music is simple ... centered around me playing my guitar and vocal, I usually add fretless bass (Bob Hart) and percussion. That's it. My vocal is up front, easy to understand lyrics ... and so I want a warm mic with tons of presence.
I'll be recording next month and have much info to absorb, but I want to buy a GREAT vocal mic and a GREAT guitar mic ... actually, I've been thinking about making a Jenkin Disk, with another mic in center and about 2 feet in front of the Jenkin, and just record me and my guitar performing live - as the foundation.
I haven't heard of the 414EB ... damn! I feel so STUPID! LOL!
Thanks, everyone ... I really appreciate the help.
pax,
Alan Horvath http://AlanHorvath.com
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: bdbklyn
|
|
|
