NADY RSM-4 Ribbon Microphone

This is a NADY RSM-4 ribbon microphone. This is an excellent microphone for its price (typical street price is around $80.00 USD). This mic is of the “short ribbon, long path” variety (referring to the configuration of the ribbon motor - click here for an excellent article by Michael Joly explaining the different types of ribbon microphones). The NADY RSM-4 appears identical to the SYR30 microphone manufactured by Shanhai ShuaiYin Electronics Ltd. Alctron has a similar model, the HRM-15.

Ribbon microphones are relatively simple, passive devices. A ribbon mic operates by suspending a very thin corrugated ribbon between two strong magnets. Sound waves vibrate the ribbon, which generates a tiny current. This tiny current is then sent through a built-in output/matching transformer. Ribbon microphones also require a lot of gain compared to other types of microphones, so a good preamp is a must.

Because of their relative simplicity, Chinese ribbon microphones are very popular platforms for modification, usually involving little more that upgrading the transformer and removing any extra layers of mesh in the headbasket and/or around the ribbon motor itself.

Because the ribbons are so thin (frequently 2 microns or less), ribbon microphones are extremely fragile and even the slightest breeze can destroy the ribbon. Because of this, ribbon microphones are simply not suited for live, on-stage sound reinforcement use. Ribbon mics were used extensively in the motion picture and broadcasting industry for decades and can still be seen sitting on the desks of many television talk show hosts like Larry King.

The NADY RSM-4 microphone has a very warm, robust character which is typical of ribbon microphones in general. This microphone sounds excellent on trombone and would also be near the top of my list for trumpet as well. It doesn’t have quite the transient response or top end I would like for violin or viola, but I would definitely consider it for string bass. This mic would also work well with tenor and (especially) baritone sax.

Although the NADY RSM-4 is rated to handle very high SPL’s, I would be very selective about what type of sound sources I would put near this microphone. Certainly, any source that generates a large movement of air would be out of the question, for example in front of a bass (or “kick”) drum.

Cascade VX20

Like the MXL 992 below, the Cascade VX20 has a 10db pad for high SPL sources, plus a low-cut switch to reduce proximity effect with close-in vocalists. The Cascade VX20 also comes with a shock mount of respectable quality.

The sonic characteristics of the Cascade VX20 are interestingly similar to the MXL 992; however, I notice ever-so-slightly less definition in the midrange frequencies with the Cascade mic. This is a very subtle difference and I would consider it a matter of personal taste as to which of the two microphones I would prefer for a particular acoustic instrument.

Given a choice between the two microphones, I might be inclined to choose the Cascade VX20 over the MXL 992 if I were called upon to record a harpsichord (for example). I feel the Cascade mic would give me good transient response and a clean sound, but not so much “edge” as to over-emphasize the plucking of the strings. I feel this microphone would also work well on banjo or steel string acoustic guitar.

MXL 992

This is the MXL 992. It’s a fairly large microphone, although not as large as the MXL 960 shown below. Nonetheless, I would suggest it be mounted on a secure stand with a low center of gravity. The 992 comes supplied with a shock mount, which will also work with the MXL 990; however, the shock mount that comes with the 990 shouldn’t be used with the 992, as the width of the band on the 990 shock mount is not wide enough to properly secure the 992. It also comes with a nice case for transporting and storing the mic.

The MXL 992 comes with 10db pad for handling instruments with high SPL’s and a low-cut switch to mitigate proximity effect on close-in vocals.

The 992 has sonic qualities that are similar to the 990, but with a more robust bottom end. This may be due, in part, to the larger capsule of the 992. Overall, I like this microphone and would not hesitate to use it for any application where I would use the MXL 990. Plus, I would be more inclined to use this mic on horns such as tenor or baritone sax than the MXL 990.

The MXL 992 also seems to have a respectable level of transient response, so I would consider using this microphone on piano, although it might not be my first choice for strings. I feel the MXL 603S is more suited for this purpose.

Update 1/17/2010: Like the MXL 603’s I tested two MXL 992’s with the same 1898-vintage Sohmer upright piano. The only difference I noticed is that the 992 sounds more robust in the bass register. Plus, I noticed a slight emphasis in the midrange frequencies as compared to the 603’s. Because of the more robust lower frequency response, I might be more inclined to use the 992’s on a concert grand piano. I would classify this preference as only a matter of personal taste as both the 603 and 992 sound very good on piano in general.

MXL 603S

The MXL 603S is a “pencil” condenser microphone that bears a resemblance to the Alctron T01A. The 603S capsule is a copy of the Neumann KM-84. The transient response of the MXL 603S is excellent which makes this microphone particularly well suited for acoustic string instruments (piano, violin, viola, harp, acoustic guitar, etc.) and as drum overheads. Cymbals shimmer with this microphone.

I don’t recommend this mic for vocals as it is extremely sensitive to plosive syllables and wind noise. The mic comes supplied with a windscreen made of rather dense foam. I strongly recommend its use in any environment where there is even the slightest breeze. I would only consider it for sound reinforcement indoors where this sort of thing can be controlled.

The MXL 603S has received excellent reviews elsewhere and is the subject of a modification process by Michael Joly, which (allegedly) results in much-improved sonic qualities. I must say that, even in its stock form, this microphone is an excellent choice for acoustic string instruments.

Update 1/17/2010: I tested two MXL 603’s with an 1898-vintage Sohmer upright piano and they sounded excellent. They have a very smooth response in both the bass and treble registers, with just the right amount of crispness without sounding edgy. I would not hesitate to use these microphones on any acoustic piano, particularly upright or spinet models.

Behringer C-1

This is the Behringer C-1. It’s a phantom powered, studio condenser microphone which has a red LED on the front to indicate when phantom power is applied. Unfortunately, this microphone represents a good example of inconsistent quality control. I tested two samples of this mic and one of them was so noisy I would have to characterize it as virtually unusable. The signal to noise ratio is so poor, and the noise floor so high that it leads me to believe that it’s a factory defect.

The second sample I tested was much better. The noise floor was much lower, but it was still noticeable. The frequency response seems to favor the mid-range with very little bottom end. Because of the less-than-stellar signal to noise ratio, I would not consider this microphone for any acoustic instrument that plays anywhere below mezzo forte. For pianissimo harp, piano, acoustic classical guitar, strings, etc. this microphone simply should not be considered.

It’s quite possible that the two samples I tested are “lemons,” but a cursory search of the web shows that Behringer, in general, has had issues with inconsistent quality control, so caveat emptor.

Update 1/19/2010:  I listened to both samples of these mics again and have concluded that the noise I heard was a result of the settings I used on my preamp.  I no longer feel these microphones are defective; however, the Behringer C-1 would still not be my microphone of choice for pianissimo acoustic instruments.

MXL 960

The MXL 960 is a large, tube condenser microphone. It’s large enough that one must consider its size and weight when selecting a microphone stand. This microphone is also very susceptible to handling noise and external vibration, so a shock mount is highly recommended. Unfortunately, the MXL 960 doesn’t come supplied with one, so a shock mount has to be purchased separately.

It does come with a foam windscreen, which implies that the MXL 960 can be used outdoors in a sound reinforcement scenario; however, I don’t recommend it. The sensitivity and polar pattern of this microphone is a recipe for unmanageable feedback. In my opinion, the MXL 960 is best left in the studio. It is simply not suited for on-stage sound reinforcement use.

The instructions that come with the MXL 960 recommend that it be mounted and used upside down to keep tube heat away from the capsule. This is generally good advice for any tube microphone that generates any heat to speak of. With this being said, I have used it in an upright position for short periods with no problem. Even after extended periods of time, the microphone casing just barely gets warm to the touch.

In contrast to the Stellar CM-3 reviewed below, the MXL 960 has less “edge” to the sound, most likely due to the MXL 960’s larger capsule. It also has a much more pronounced proximity effect which, for some vocalists, can be a desirable characteristic that can be exploited to advantage.

This microphone has a very robust bottom end and sounds great on trombone, particularly bass trombone.  It follows that the MXL 960 would sound just as good on euphonium and tuba.

Although the literature (as well as MXL's website) state that the MXL 960 uses a 12AT7 tube, the stock tube is marked "MXL" with no other markings.  This has led to speculation on some audio and recording forums that the stock tube is, in fact, a garden-variety Chinese 12AX7.  I have not taken any steps to prove or disprove this claim as the MXL 960 sounds excellent with the stock tube.  With that being said, the tube is very accessible and easily changed which allows for experimentation with NOS (new old stock) tubes of different manufacturers (Mullard, GE, RCA, etc.).  These tube substitutions can yield different sonic qualities which, in some cases, are an improvement over the stock tube.

Stellar CM-3

The Stellar CM-3 is a tube condenser microphone manufactured by Acltron Electronics of China and rebadged as the Stellar CM-3 (Alctron model T50P). As is with all condenser mics, the Stellar CM-3 requires an external dedicated power supply.

Generally speaking, tube condenser microphones have a “warmer” character than their equivalent phantom powered counterparts (although, this is not always true). In the case of the Stellar CM-3, this microphone seems to work well on acoustic string bass. It exhibits somewhat of a “crisp” quality that actually seems to enhance the articulation of a pizzicato “walking” bass line. Although I haven’t tested this mic with other string instruments, it exhibits all the necessary characteristics that I can safely recommend it for violin, viola, etc. I’m hoping to test it on piano shortly & post an update.

I don’t recommend this mic on amplified strings, as its inherent “crispness” might take on an edgy quality that might have to be toned down in the mix. If this microphone is used on horns, I would advise that it be placed slightly off axis to take some of the edge off.