Mics: AT3035 has better specs than AT4033?

[Wiggum]

Hey all, I will first preface this by saying that specs don't necessarily tell a story (especially with mics and speakers). But if you compare the specs between Audio Technica's AT3035 and the AT4033, you will see that the AT3035 is superior in every category (frequency response, signal to noise ratio, dynamic range, max SPL level, etc). Perhaps its just a newer mic and it benefits from newer technology. But for $100 cheaper, it really makes me think... One other question: [b]Why does the AT3035 mention variable phantom power?[/b] Whereas the AT4033 needs 48V, the AT3035 mentions 2V-52V. Does this mean the AT3035 can operate on any voltage in that range? Bottom line: My console provides 48V (Mackie 1402) - is this sufficient for the AT3035? All the best, Wiggum

[Mats Olsson.]

My dad is stronger than your dad! When it comes to microphones & specs: Specs is nothing, performance is everything. Specs does not give any clues about how a product sounds with your sources and your other gear in your studio. I bet that the new AT has way better specs than an old U47, do you wanna bet on what probably will sound best in many situations? Two microphones can have identical specs and still sound very different. Same goes for loudspeakers and other gear. Regarding the variable power requrement: the AT3035's capsule is probably an electret capsule, not a true condensor capsule design. Anyways, your Mackie should have no problem feeding an AT 4033 or 3035 (or most other condensor and/or electret mikes currently available - except for some tube mikes that comes with their own PSU's. Microtek Gefell has a tube mike that runs on 48v though). /Mats [ 11-10-2001: Message edited by: mats.olsson@rockfile.se ]

[LeiDeLi]

I have owned a 4033 (pretty good mike), but have not owned a 3035, but I am interested. Specs certainly don't tell *everything* about a sound, but they do give a pretty good indicator of general tonality (to those who know how to read them). I have never heard a mike whose sound wasn't pretty close to what you would expect from looking at the specs (including sensitivity, directionality, freq. response, and noise levels). I think that mike sales are predominantly a market driven thing, and the market is generally driven by people who really don't have a lot of experience testing high-quality mikes. For example, the C1 is probably a fine mike, but how many people who are raving about it have actually heard very many other good large diaphragm condensers ? Most admit that it is their first one, so of course it sounds great. So it seems very reasonable to me that newer designed mikes, with newer manufacturing methods, actually are both superior in sound and sell for less. Why lower the price of the 4033 when there are still a large base of fans willing to pay $300 for it ? :) The 3035 seems like a pretty good gamble. If you try it, please post a review. peace, LeiDeLi

[sbrock1san.rr.com]

Why buy the 4033 over the all the $200 large diaphram condenser mikes ?....because almost all of them don't offer a -10 pad or hi-pass filter(bass roll-off) that the 4033 does.