A few weeks back, I pulled out some microphones and ran them back to back through the tweed Champ clone to check out the differences. Here are the Green Bullet series. I'm interested in what y'all think...
I reckon there's not much in it. To all the purists who don't like the latest 520 dx, I bet the average punter is not going to pick much difference ---------- Lucky Lester
I did listen to the video, all the way through. In my opinion, there's not a great deal in it, especially for the average punter.
Without wanting to state the bleeding obvious, its clearly way more important what you play and how you play it than what you play through.
Don't get me wrong, I love my vintage mics, and think nothing really sounds like a controlled magnetic. I have yet to pay a silly price for a 'Black label' Controlled reluctance (though its just a matter of time), but I suspect that when I do, it will be like the first time I compared a 520dx with a controlled magnetic; I was underwhelmed at the real difference. Its clear that subtle differences between mics becomes more apparent as cupping technique and playing ability improve, but to my ears its not chalk and cheese. The most notable differences seem to be in gain, volume and feedback threshold. Check out Ron Sunshines Ebay mic demos. I think there is only one mic I heard him play that didn't sound great; he'd get a good tone from a jam tin with a piece of string to the amp. ---------- Lucky Lester
Last Edited by on Feb 07, 2012 12:28 AM
To my ear the 520D sounded best. It had a little more bottom end than the 99A86 in the JT30. The 520DX was a little brighter. The difference were very small though. If you hadn't said which was which I don't think many players could tell the difference.
Joe_L, thanks for your posts. I really enjoy them, and I always check out your links.
@all
Anyone listen to these through a great sound source? While you can hear differences (even on my crappy laptop speakers) it might be valuable to judge the overall quality of sound on good speakers.
I have some great studio headphones, but even they don't paint an accurate picture. Until I get studio monitor (soon) I playback through my PA mains when I can.
I listened on my pc headphones without watching the video. I class my listening as 'joe public' and I couldn't hear any difference. I thought it was good that you played approximately the same thing each time. So often when people do demos they play different things to make the one they want to sound best be the best. ---------- "Come on Brackett let's get changed"
It was nice to hear the side-by-side comparison of vintage and modern elements. I was surprised by how good the modern DX sounded. If I were sitting in an audience in front of a whole band, I wouldn't have been able to tell one from the other. Personally, I liked the Mexican element clip best, but that could have been playing technique over straight sound quality. ----------
I would say that on my sounds system which is fairly decent as a computer speakers go, There was not a great difference that I could tell between your mics. If anything I thought that the first one may have a tad more fullness to it. Most likely a live ear might tell more. I also think If I were to actually play the mics I could feel a difference ,possibly. In any case thanks for the post. It stimulated a good discussion.
I see that Greg H. hasn't chimed in on this topic yet. I've gotten somewhat jaded about mics, partly due to some points that have already been brought up here, partly due to the fact that I've played through alotta 58's eq'd for voice while getting asked up, and partly due to the fact that I've often chosen mics outa my stable based on what amp or PA i'm playin' through. Both of my favorite mics are heavy and somewhat large (Shure bullet and a vintage Shure 515), and I like 'em that way...even after 4 hours. The point for my needs is that, since the band I play with crosses over constantly between various blues forms, old & current rock, pop, even 40's classics, etc., I can't use a rig set up for that dirty brown Piazza style tone (except when sitting in with other bands), hence I change my cup and proximity constantly to control my tone. Reverb or Delay are my only fx, and moderate differences between mics are a non-factor. I appreciate those who post these comparisons however, because it does help me make decisions on what to use when playing "center field".
OK so GregH will chime in. Joe sounds good through any mic, because Joe plays well, and he has excellent mic technique. However if you heard Joe play the 520DX and a good CM or CR, live, you would hear that the 520DX is thinner and harsher. That is quite simply because it has much more extended high frequency response. The old CR's and CM's roll off at about 7000Hz. I don't have the 520DX spec in front of me but I'm sure it goes higher than that. It also probably has a little more headroom, which means it tolerates higher sound pressure levels before breaking up. A very good cupping technique will overcome that to some extent.
Joe is playing through a Tweed Champ clone. Like other small amps it adds a lot of its own breakup and color, which tends to make mics sound more alike. A Kalamazoo will do the same thing. Played through a bigger amp you will hear the differences more. Nevertheless, after letting the video load all the way and clicking the timeline back and forth for an instantaneous comparison, I can hear a little more warmth and more breakup from the CM than the 520DX. ---------- /Greg
I've found that all of my mics sound good at home in my living room...Same is true with my amps. However, when I'm playing live through an amp that's big enough to keep up with the volume I can instantly tell the difference. The notes just pop out of the CRs and the really hot CMs. Not so much with the others. YMMV All the best, Jay ---------- Music speaks where words fail.
Also, I doubt that the crowd hears much difference. I recently used my Harp Commander Four for an entire gig. However, I had it sitting on top of my 1960 Fender Concert for the entire evening [with the standby on]. I got lots of compliments on my tone and my vintage amp. LOL Play the gear that YOU like. ---------- Music speaks where words fail.
tmf714 - The clips that of Dennis are good in so much as they use a variety of amps. Dennis is of course doing that for sale purposes and I for one think it's a good move. Especially as he doesn't daisy chain the amps or uses effects as some vendors do. Which means of course that you get the pure mic to amp sound.
However to create a test to get people to choose which mic they think sounds best, or indeed to identify a particular element. The only real way to do that is to perform a blind test. I suspect that if this were done then most players couldn't identify the differences so easily. Especially between CM, CR, Dynamic. Or ceramic over crystal.
@tmf very good post. I agree with Kingly about a blind taste is the best way to determine what you like best, but there are so many options it is almost impossible!
Yaeh Lmbrjak Dennis sure can make a Harp king sound good!
The lsat mic through the Harp King was a nice balanced tone. If find alot that you can play something at home and think it has a sweet fat tone, but when you get out and start playing with other people your sound can be dull or flat sounding. I think we all obsess over tone to much! I believe if you play the harp enough to point where you are very good. You'll have good tone! On Joe L's comparison I could hear the little growl/dirty sound, the second one wasn't so dirty, but nice and the last sounded without as much bass. One thing I have noticed with my mics and amps is the CM elements don't feed back as much as the new 520DX. I always felt like I had to get a strangle hold on the 520DX to get a good sound. Then as soon as I let up it feed back. I have owned three of them and they all did it! Yes I am a slow learner!
Last Edited by on Feb 09, 2012 6:55 AM
