Sound & quality

The frequency response of Maono PM500 is remarkably flat as if it was a reference mic – only the highs are lifted slightly before they start rolling off. This happens after 10 kHz, so the higher end doesn’t have as much air as let’s say a typical SDC. However, the roll off is gentle and the overall curve is smooth and while being actually flat up to that point, this contributes to a natural sound. Unlike some other LDCs, it doesn’t have any sudden bumps in response, which is notable. Thus, you will never hear any harsh resonance or anything like that. On the other hand, the reduction in airy part of the spectrum and the fact that it’s an LDC are responsible for its mellow character.

By mellow I don’t mean ribbon-like when it’s taken to extreme. Rather, it presents itself with feeling less of open air or space. It is certainly not as hot as condenser mics are in general. It will still pick up the background in absence of speaker but it doesn’t amplify those sounds further. In fact, rather the opposite is true. In terms of crispiness, it is definitely crisp and detailed when talking in front of the mic. Not as crispy of course as say an SDC with brightened response, which also tend to be hot, but more like a good dynamic mic, or even a broadcast mic. On the other hand, PM500 is not susceptible to sibilance (which is a very common issue) even when high shelf is applied.

When it comes to lower end, I find it even more interesting. It is rich and extends very low to 30 Hz, but what blows me away is the absence of proximity. Even when speaking up close it gives me a natural sound, ready for production, without introducing any bloating. Of course, one may say this is expected of a large diaphragm mic, for a fact it is so. However, this is definitely unexpected from a mic of this price. For this money, you could barely even buy a cheapest SDC like an AT2020 and even when you do, you would end up having to deal with that… puffy AT2020 sound, which isn’t easy to EQ because the proximity boost is not constant and varies highly with distance.

I am not trying to demote AT2020 of course, but I find it handy for comparison in regards to the proximity effect where Maono PM500 clearly comes on top. I also find it amusing comparing PM500 with broadcast mics because of some semblance in the way they sound. Particularly in the lower end, the female voice sounds almost exactly as when spoken. The male voice may be getting a little bit of a broadcaster effect – if there is a boost, it must be gentle, but I would say it just naturally reproduces the richness of your voice and does it much more accurately than a typical directional SDC – it never gets puffy or bloated and the sound is ready for production.

Application

I will now talk about the application of the PM500 microphone. First, I shall briefly cover the possible usage for instruments and then move on to vocals in more detail. In order to get the best out of this mic please be mindful of these three considerations: it has an above average self-noise, it is mellow in character and the maximum SPL is 120 dB. On percussions for instance, SPL could play a limiting factor; for cymbals, it could be too warm, though it depends. In general, if you can get a clean signal from your instruments without the need for gain, it should work just fine. Particularly I believe it would work for guitars (up close), brass, pianos, pipes and bass cabs.

For vocals, the usage is broad. It can be used for voice-overs because it provides a good sound quality and rejects the background noise. The same applies for podcasting, and the fact that any post-processing is optional makes it easy to set up. Also viable for streaming, the trick here is to position the mic in such a way that it doesn’t obstruct the view. I was able to achieve this by rotating the mic up +20°, so that the bottom of the mic faces the keyboard (which also helps to reject the key strokes). The metal pop-shield that attaches to shock mount is quite compact, I point it next to my mouth and it isn’t seen by the webcam positioned on top of my monitor.

Naturally, you may want to connect this mic to a computer in order to record, stream and make videos on the go. Nowadays all you would need is an audio interface, a cheapest Focusrite or Presonus would do, and that will cost you only about $100. Considering the Maono PM500 is quite cheap as well, you can end up having a commendable audio quality at home for just about $200. Compared to the sound of an average USB mic that plugs directly to a computer, the difference in sound quality is simply too big to ignore. Here is a sample recorded in a noisy background environment for the purpose of demonstrating the sound in a typical home setting.

maono-pm500-sample

The audio interface I used is actually SSL2+, which is rather luxurious but the two brands mentioned above could do just fine. Nice thing about SSL is that it has a ‘4K’ mode, which boosts highs just a little, and can be quite useful with this mic. Some basic form of high shelf is probably the only form of EQ I would consider applying to PM500. This is because the included pop shield is metal and I believe it dampens the higher frequencies, also speaking off-axis to an LDC will reduce the highs, so that’s a good way of compensating for that. However, this is a versatile mic; you can also speak more on axis and use a regular pop-filter instead to achieve the same effect.

Conclusion

Maono PM500 is ideal for home studio, be it recording of vocals, voice-overs, podcasting or even streaming, and would also work for most musical instruments. Flat on-axis response and minimized proximity effect result in a very natural, rich sound while the off axis response with a large diaphragm gives it a mellow character. This mic has a good clarity but is not as crisp as smaller diaphragms; thus also not as hot to the background. It doesn’t seem to be affected by sibilance or harsh resonances. The sound is ready for production and doesn’t really need any post-processing. Priced so absurdingly low, it also comes with a free shock mount and pop shield.

Best Price on Maono PM500

---

Sound quality

RE20 is an industry standard for a reason and that reason being the sound quality. Of course, it may not be the most expressive mic out there, nor the most transparent or crispy as condenser mics are. Yet, it produces a reliable, quality signal that is suitable for live and radio broadcasting. Most importantly, it ensures the maximum rejection of the background noises that no condenser mics can offer no matter the price range. In a live recording, you don’t want to capture any accidental room or street noise with no ways to cut it out and this is especially true for the venues that have far from studio conditions.

Aside from it having a massive dynamic diaphragm of course, the RE-20 capsule is wrapped in a thicker foam than the RE320, which gives it an extra bit of dampening. In a side-by-side comparison, the RE-20 may sound weaker and darker but don’t get fooled by the first impression, because the RE-20 still has an upper hand when it comes to signal quality and that extra bit of background rejection is what distinguishes a high-end broadcast mic from a regular one. RE320 is also a nice mic, especially if you like a brighter sound and want something more expressive but the RE-20 is overall smoother.

And finally, why people use dynamic broadcast mics is because of the RF-interference, which obviously is an issue at the radio stations where powerful radio transmitters are used. Why dynamic mics are less sensitive to the electromagnetic interference is mainly because of the simplicity of their electrical design – there is only one thing and that’s the coil and all modern mics use humbacking coils that help to neutralize the induced signals whereas condensers are much more complex and electrically sensitive. The body of the mic and grilles also serve as shielding and the RE-20 metal casing is almost as thick as tank.

Overall

Overall, the Electro-Voice RE-20 can be considered the heavy artillery of the broadcasting. It is considered an industry standard and it probably surpasses other broadcast mics when it comes to signal quality, but it’s also more expensive and may require other pieces of equipment, such as preamp to be on par to get the best of it. The sound tone can be described as deep, rich and neutral but also quite smooth. It is bulkier and heavier than the alternatives and the offered shock-mount from the EV could have been better, on the other hand, it is not designed to be moved much and has a very good sweet spot.

- Reviewed at $399.00

Best Price on Electro-Voice RE20

---

Sound and quality

Rode Procaster’s frequency response is full, smooth and transparent: it has a flat midrange and some nice clarity boost with a very smooth transition – no bumps or dents whatsoever. The lows are hyped a bit too much due to proximity and the fact that you have to be right on top of it at a close range in order for it to work, and initially may come out as muddy and unattractive. However, after applying a basic low cut filter, this nuance is taken care of and the mic truly starts to shine. Suddenly it sounds much more expensive and now you can hear the Rode Procaster’s clarity with its sweet and silky-smooth highs.

The low-end is once again a bit bloated and lush but does not affect the midbass or low midrange, so it’s quite easily manageable – even a beginner could adjust the richness to his taste with a basic low cut. Procaster has a built-in pop filter that does an excellent job too; filtering some imperfections, very little popping goes through if at all, and neither will you hear any sibilance. It also acts as windscreen and yet the sound is still very much transparent, not one bit inferior to any other dynamic broadcast mic. And of course, it fulfills its promise of reducing the room and background noise to the very minimum, inaudible levels.

•  Rode Procaster in action, watch this video:

Recording & broadcasting

The qualities of this mic are ideal for recording and radio use, and to give a fair example there is a popular radio called Wish FM. The link is to their YouTube channel where they have hundreds of videos of radio songs all exclusively recorded with Rode Procaster. They literally used it on every single performer and with a good success too. What makes this project unique is that it is recorded in a moving studio, a sound proofed bus that records those songs while driving on the streets. Needless to say, it takes maximum sound rejection for it to work and yet it doesn’t seem to affect the quality, the mic sounds pretty natural.

Despite the use of spider shock mount, it looks decent on camera because the tip prolongs quite a bit and being narrower than the Shure SM7B, it does not really obscure the vision. The only downside is that it’s more of a stationary mic: compared to SM7B it’s quite unwieldy and actually feels much heavier even though both of them weigh the same. Rode Procaster definitely works for recording but there may be a few considerations for podcasting. It is fine if you can keep it stationary because you don’t want to move it around while recording, and you would need a good swivel boom arm and a shock mount for it.

Conclusion

Rode Procaster is a very versatile mic with an excellent sound quality that has proven itself for recording purposes and it’s quite affordable compared to similar mics from other producers. Aside from a bassy low-end, it has a smooth uniform response with a good transparency and, it offers a very good background rejection, just as you would expect from a broadcast microphone. It still needs quite a bit of gain, though this should not be a problem with a decent equipment. For podcasting, it may not be the most comfortable, but if you can apply a low cut filter in real time and keep it stationary, then you shouldn’t have any problems.

- Reviewed at $227.99

Best Price on Rode Procaster

---

WARNING! MAKE SURE YOUR AMAZON SELLER IS AUTHORIZED: https://rode.com/en/support/where-to-buy

Sound & quality

AKG P220 features a relatively flat response curve and warm sound overall. The lows are definitely rich and responsive, though probably not the cleanest. It seems as though it is lacking midrange and instead a bit exaggerating on lows especially when you attempt to mike vocals up close. I don’t like how it sounds when it’s too close for this reason, what’s even more it becomes somewhat harsh on the ears. Perhaps it’s a bit too sensitive to vocals, but having said that, if you give it some distance suddenly it shines and produces a much better studio-worthy sound, which is hard to believe judging by its retail price.

Indeed, if you are using it in a decent environment with the right technique, while giving it a bit of space, it sounds quite impressive. C214/414 will beat it of course but nothing under $250 will for sure. As for home usage and that goes without saying, it will beat the crap out of your USB mic but in a small room, it would pick a bit too much reverb. You would have to get on top of it and then deal with post processing and fixing the EQ. Talking of which, I feel it could use some more brightness especially some presence on vox; nevertheless, it has lots of detail to it and sounds quite crispy on instruments.

The condenser capsule is of course electret; no externally polarized mics are available for this price. Diaphragm size of the AKG P220 has a solid 1-inch in diameter, and it actually has a significant off-axis coloration, much more than other similar LDCs. That is why despite being normally flat on axis; it really doesn’t sound like it if you are desperately trying to record vocals up-close, because this technique assumes you have to be off-axis. However, given some distance, you can move a bit more on-axis without causing it to sound neither dark nor harsh. This is not so big of a deal on instruments though.

In regards to noise, it’s actually much worse than the AT2035 but still fine, compared to let’s say lavalier mics. This shouldn’t matter unless you are trying to record something whisper quiet, which would be a dumb thing to attempt to anyway on this type of budget gear. The exact figures for the Perception 220 are as follows: sensitivity = 20 mV/Pa, equivalent noise level = 16 dB-A. In comparison, AT2035’s sensitivity = 22.4 mV/Pa, and equivalent noise = 12 dB-A. Using my favorite 20·log10(V1/V2) formula, the difference in sensitivity can be converted into additional 1 dB, which makes an effective 5 dB difference in noise.

Features and build

This mic has two controls, low cut filter rolling off 300 Hz and -20 dB pad. The roll off could be used for instruments that are above this frequency range. The pad could perhaps be used when close-miking a cymbal… but otherwise I don’t find them particularly useful. On vocals that low cut would really cut out all the juice meanwhile the pad making them inaudible altogether. Not a big deal here, as they are just a bonus. The good thing is that the mic comes in a sturdy case with a spider shock mount, which to me is surprising considering how cheap it already is, but the same goes for the AT2035 its direct competitor.

The build is quite sturdy and stylish. Black metal body of the AKG P220 contrasts with a platinum mesh. AKG brand is also more trustworthy than let’s say CAD, so all that makes for a solid and durable mic. Among the most popular applications are of course vocals, miking of acoustic guitars and other instruments, also working for guitar cabs. Shines as overheads in small, light & jazzy drum setups. They pick up quite a bit of toms and the whole set altogether, however really lack brightness when used on heavier multi-mic setups. Bottom line: AKG P220 is a good and inexpensive starter for vocals that can be later repurposed for instruments.

- Reviewed at $134.00

Best Price on AKG Perception 220

---

Sound & quality

Just as one would expect from a large diaphragm studio mic, it provides a deep low-end response with a great richness of sound. It is relatively accurate for not only voice but also kick drums and bass cabs. The strength of proximity effect is moderate but it doesn’t change its quality whether the source is directly on axis or off axis. That being said, it likes to have some space, if you bring it too close it may actually sound too loud and distorted. You definitely don’t want to eat this mic, but when the proper distance is maintained, it sounds smooth without any issue. Just keep in mind that this is a sensitive mic.

Having covered the low end, it is crucial to note about the RE320’s bright character. Although for the most part it is flat, the highs are actually shelved to +4.5 dB, which is quite noticeable. Then again, higher transient response makes it hotter, which some podcasters have little tolerance to. Shure SM7B definitely sounds mellower. Yet this only seems to be relevant if you are in a noisy or an untreated room. In the right environment, the Electro-Voice RE320 actually gives more advantage when it comes to recording. On the other hand, it is also fairly easy to reduce the EQ to complete flat in the mixer.

In my personal experience, the RE320 sounds great without any external EQ. It just sounds a bit different from a traditional flat broadcaster mic and may need some getting used to. Then again, it is also a common practice to brighten up the flat mics for the same purpose, so which one is ultimately better in this case might be arguable. Generally, the flat response is the way to go for podcasting and voiceovers while a brighter response is more suitable for music and recording. Just to summarize my point, RE320 is suitable for both, although the SM7B is more suited when it comes to broadcasting.

Instrument recording

RE320 is also marketed for instrument miking, which it does justice too. If you’re still heavily relying on the SM57 as a general instrument mic, perhaps it’s time to reconsider your recording arsenal and add some heavyweight toys such as RE320. This mic excels at recording wind and brass instruments like sax, trombone / trumpet and especially their bass counterparts. It is capable of producing a clean sound with remarkable clarity white also retaining the lows. Works great for kick drum and toms as well, for which it has a special EQ mode that scoops out the boxy sound and keeps the unhyped oomph plus the attack.

Design and build

The mic is literally big and heavy – it is a solid build with lots of metal. However, because it is also longer, it actually looks better on camera than the fatter SM7B; it does not obstruct the face as much, especially when used without mount. RE320 does not have an internal shock mount, so unless you can avoid touching both the mic and the table this is a must. Pop filter on the other hand is optional. Another thing that is worth noting is that the mic has a very high degree protection from RFI, including high-pitched interference from cellphones. But there is no surprise because its main use is for the radio stations.

- Reviewed at $295.00

Best Price on Electro-Voice RE320

---

Sound & quality

If I were asked to review this mic in one word, I would say “bright” – like hell. There is about 10 dB difference between highs and lows, which is a bit bizarre but the overall transition is so smooth and gradual, and without any noticeable dips or bumps along the way that it actually makes sense. The idea here is we don’t really need any lows on overheads – their purpose is to brighten the sound, highlighting the cymbals. But if cut too abruptly they would sound artificial and wouldn’t mix well. Despite the brightness, those aren’t too harsh on the ears but technically every mic has some amount of distortion.

I would say it’s a decent tradeoff for the price, especially for something that ‘sounds’ right. On paper, we could find a number of high-end mics with much better specs, but once plugged you realize they don’t really work the way you expected. Talking about specs Audix does not provide complete information on ADX51, which is a bummer. For instance, I couldn’t find signal to noise ratio in their spreadsheet but once again it’s not all about specs. Are there are better mics? Yes of course, but some are outright expensive, some would only work for particular setups and others… the majority are actually both.

I still find Audix ADX51 fits in more as a universal overhead solution, and it does a good job handling that treble. There is no lack of clarity, a good amount of brilliance (even though the highs roll off a bit prematurely at 15 kHz), and of course, those SDCs are expectedly crispy. The amount of treble does seem a bit overwhelming at first, but it works in the mix, so why complain about something that works? Having covered the brightness aspect, the miniscule amount of bass that keeps continuously rolling off is quite disappointing. The good thing, this is absolutely not needed for overhead miking.

Other uses?

The bad thing, it is hard to think of any other application. ATM450 for example I could use for a whole lot of different things, it wouldn’t necessarily always provide perfect results but it could easily handle an acoustic guitar at least. With ADX51, it is not even worth trying, everything just sounds too thin: an acoustic guitar becomes ukulele, a double bass becomes violin – well you get the idea. Maybe in certain cases when you don’t really need the bass portion of the sound below 100 hZ and actually require a bright mic, for example in order to cut through a dense mix, only then it could be worth using.

- Reviewed at $219.79

Best Price on Audix ADX51

---

Sound & quality

Audio-Technica ATM450 has a brightened response that emphasizes presence, slightly adding to upper midrange and brilliance. Interestingly the peak is at 6.5 kHz, which cannot but remind of SM57 albeit with less aggression and more smoothness to it, and of course a far superior clarity of a condenser. The midrange is expectedly flat and uncolored. The lows present another surprise: at first glance on frequency response, they may seem like rolling off, but that’s not true. The lows are only brought down a few dB lower (which is hardly noticeable) yet remain flat all the way to the bottom, claimed @ 40 Hz.

Possible applications

Talking about lows, ATM450 indeed sounds very rich without noticeable distortions or color. This is why, it can well be used on bass cabs and it’s not a gimmick, because the lowest note on 4-string bass guitar is 41 Hz, so it perfectly fits the specs. To match the claimed response, the mic should be placed on-axis 12” from the source, though I suppose you should place it a few inches closer because the diaphragm is actually recessed into the cab but that’s the theory. Another application that comes to mind is miking a double bass since they have a similar response, though you’d still need to keep some distance.

This one also works for miking all kinds of fiddles, acoustic guitars and stringed instruments, which is a standard stuff that can be done with many different mics. In this regard, it should work pretty fine but I don’t think it would give you any significant advantage aside from having an accurate low-end. Nevertheless if you like the form factor, and think you can afford it… might as well use it, at least the quality of recording would not be a problem! Sometimes though finding your ideal instrument mic for this usage can be a pain in the ass. Almost every decent mic here is pricey and anything sub $100 is usually garbage, but oh well…

Audio-Technica ATM450, thanks to its side address pickup has another interesting usage, which is miking a closed lid grand piano. For this setup you would need two mics, one for higher and one for lower register. You would then mount them inside the piano, pointing to the strings. This can produce some very good results: since the lid is closed, the air pressure stays inside, which allows capturing the richness of the lower register in its entirety. On the other hand, a closed lid provides isolation and helps greatly reducing the bleed from other sound sources.

Overheads & snare

One of the great usage for this mic is overheads; if you can grab a pair, they will make your life happier. If you have too many cymbals, you would also need spot mics, otherwise you will not be able to hear all the nuances, effectively making the drummer sound weird. ATM450 does work for spot miking, especially on hi-hat but it could turn out expensive if you have to buy many of them. For other cymbals, I personally prefer the SM81 but it’s actually even more expensive so this doesn’t help. However, for a light drum kit a pair of ATM450 overheads will do great, making it easier to build a stereo image as well.

ATM450 sounds good on toms too, but there are many specialized mics than can get the job done much cheaper, so this would be a waste. I did leave the snare drum for the dessert… but I think this could be the best usage for the mic, especially when miking a snare top in a double mic setup. Oh boy, not only it fits the snare perfectly – the sound just blows you out of the water! Even in a single mic setup, it can make a tremendous improvement. I already compared it to SM57 and not without a reason, as it has been an industry standard for snare. ATM450 offers a similar tone only the sound is far superior.

Should you buy it?

One may find it difficult to envisage how this mic works and sounds because the specs don’t show much of significance, the model itself is relatively unknown, and so it’s easy to overlook. However, make no mistake; this is a solid quality mic, which if used correctly can rival more expensive units. The only caveat, it can be a hit or miss if you aren’t sure what to expect. Therefore, I would not recommend it if you are looking to buy your very first mic. But if you know what you’re doing and looking to expand your collection, then it’s definitely worth buying – it will find its use and prove to be an amazing addition.

- Reviewed at $249.00

Best Price on Audio-Technica ATM450

---

Sound & quality

Shure SM7B has a very rich, yet neutral and completely natural sounding low-end. In this respect, it is comparable to a quality bass microphone. You won’t hear any distortion or boominess of a typical consumer grade mic; it is just clean, deep and balanced bass. And this is one of the reasons why people fall in love with this microphone. No longer do you have to seek for a compromise between sounding boomy and thin, by cutting out that commonly distorted low end altogether. You’ll probably see the benefits even if you don’t have a low-pitched voice, but if you do, you’ll never trade it for anything else!

At the same time, it doesn’t sacrifice the quality of its entire frequency range. The midrange is just as neutral, with little if any coloration, but the high end is a gem. Despite the fact that there is a visible dip on the frequency diagram, the highs are exceptionally smooth and very transparent. It does have to do with the mic having a dynamic capsule, but it also has to do with the quality of the mic. To my ears, it sounds better than any flatter condenser because, because even the expensive condensers tend to have some amount of edginess, graininess or harshness but the SM7B is just completely smooth.

There are of course the downsides of it being a dynamic. It’s not as crispy as condensers and it doesn’t offer the extended response all the way up to 20 kHz but those aren’t really cons – more like common characteristics of any dynamic. Nevertheless, its more or less flat response, all the way up to 12 kHz should be more than sufficient for any vocal applications. It has more to do with the quality of the high end rather than how high it can go. And of course, the transient response is nowhere near to condensers, so it won’t be able to capture as much of the detail, but it’s still pretty decent for a dynamic.

On contrary, for applications other than studio recording, condensers are often too hot and literally capture everything. This is especially true for radio stations, because you don’t want to record every single fart of your guest. Not to mention the background noise, air-conditioning and all the possible room reflections, which are unavoidable outside the studio walls. But this is not the only reason why Shure SM7B is so popular. Unlike studio-grade condensers, this mic is also far easier to use. Therefore, it warrants for a more consistent production and leaves fewer chances for you or your guest to mess up.

Features

Shure SM7B has an internal shock mount that offers more than enough absorption, and it substitutes for those bulky external shock mounts you will usually see around Neumann’s. So even though the mic initially looks huge, it is actually much smaller than a Neumann + shock mount combo. Moreover, there is also an integrated pop filter, which in combination with the mic’s foam cover eliminates the need for external pop filters. Just imagine now the Neumann + shock mount + huge pop filter on top of that. This will completely obstruct your vision and make it impossible for an eye contact between the host and the guest, aside from other limitations.

There is of course a situation when you want to remove the foam windshield altogether and use a conventional pop filter. When recording the vocals in the studio, this is exactly what you will do. The reason is, foams muffle the high frequencies, so the mic won’t sound as bright as you’d want to in the mix. With SM7B, this is especially important, because it smoothens and softens the highs, and thus doesn’t sound as bright as condensers. However, it has an excellent feature called presence boost that compensates for its lack of brightness and gets you better results in the end. Low cut is also there, and it actually has a nice ‘n smooth transition but I didn’t find myself using it as much as high boost.

Setup

Although Shure SM7B takes best of a dynamic mic, you need to be cautious about one thing. It requires lots of clean gain (around 60 dB). In professional studios, this won’t be a problem but if you are using consumer grade mixers and preamps, make sure they have sufficient ‘horse power’. Otherwise, you may end up with noise or a very low output. To solve this, you could also place an additional preamp in the chain. For example, Cloudlifter, but this is just to give you an idea. I’ve seen many people complain that it doesn’t work with their subpar quality gear, but this isn’t the mic’s problem…

Best Price on Shure SM7B

---

Sound & quality

Ok, once again let’s start with the frequency diagram. What you’ll see on SM81 is that it’s incredibly flat. All the way until 15 kHz, there is almost zero color. From 15 kHz and above it starts rolling off but it’s quite insignificant. Different manufacturers have been in pursuit for a perfect linear response for decades and many have somewhat succeeded. However, most of those mics would only look cool on the charts but when put in real life recording situation they would sound real crappy. There is a lot more to it for achieving a good sound and the SM81 is one of the few mics that didn’t neglect other factors.

Aside from its non-hyped response, this mic is capable of capturing all the details and subtleties without introducing harshness or graininess, and this is a very important point. Sadly but true, many SDCs nowadays sound blatantly awful: harmonic distortions, intermodulation, phase distortions and sharp resonances are all over the place! And instead of addressing those issues directly, they simply add more brightness so that in A/B comparison they would seem have more clarity. However, recording sound engineers aren’t easily fooled, and the SM81 is what they use most of the time.

Talking about distortions, I’ve not yet finished. Unlike large diaphragm mics, SDCs aren’t that well suited for reproducing the low-end, and this often results to so-called low-end distortions. This is a huge problem and it affect almost every second SDC, to a degree. This is where another quirk comes into play – manufacturers simply introduce low cut filters meant to deaden the low end altogether, instead of fixing it. There are of course many valid reasons to use the low cut filters, but using it primarily to mask the distortions of a poorly designed mic is a bit unethical.

If you think that Shure SM81 doesn’t suffer from a distorted low end, then… you are right! Or at least it is unnoticeable. There is a different issue, it sounds much richer than other SDCs, which is great but it can be overwhelming in the mix. However, it is much easier to roll it off, than to reconstruct what is missing, and the two switchable low cut filters are there for you to help. But let’s note that despite having a beautiful low end, it still won’t replace a good LDC, because we don’t want the reader to form an impression that it can handle everything, and then use it for something it wasn’t meant to do.

Now let’s get to the technical part, particularly I would like to talk about noise. Shure SM81 is rated for 6 mV/Pa sensitivity and 16 dB-A self-noise. While the self-noise is excellent for an SDC, the sensitivity is a bit lacking behind. This doesn’t mean it’s not sensitive! It just means it will require more amplification to match the level of other mics, and this will introduce more noise. With levels matched, it would still produce less noise than let’s say CAD e70 but not by a great margin. In a nutshell, it’s quite decent and more than enough for miking instruments… just don’t expect it to be nearly as silent as shotguns.

Performance

Acoustic guitar

Shure SM81 is a brilliant choice for miking guitars although a bit costly. It gives you amazing definition with a rich, realistic low end and mind-blowing crispiness. Positioning of the mic is crucial, so take your time to try, and adjust if necessary. By pointing towards the hole or away from the hole, you can control how much low end gets through to find your ideal balance. I think it’s highly debatable that using bright mics will have any advantage in guitar miking. For instance, CAD e70 is brighter and it works beautifully for acoustics. SM81 is neutral and it sounds… even better! Perhaps it is quality that matters.

Pianos

Similar to acoustic guitars, it will also excel with pianos and grand pianos, as long as you know how and where to place it – and this is a crucial point. Obviously, even the SM57 in the right place will sound better than the SM81 in the wrong place. But of course there are amazing perks of using the SM81. It allows a much more natural and transparent sound representation and goes deeper than other SDCs, to the listener’s surprise. To tame the lower fundamentals, you need to create an area of pressure, so they don’t just disperse in the room. For this, open the piano only slightly by using a short stick.

Overheads

For overheads, those mics aren’t just great – they are almost irreplaceable. SM81 has uncolored highs, very insignificant distortion and it’s comfortable with high SPL sitting next to a cymbal. This is where I like using them most, by the way. And you don’t even need the matched pair for them to work, just buy two pieces and you are set. The only problem is that a pair will cost you around $700, which is a bit frustrating. Anything cheaper will likely sound harsher or colored. But there are also better mics! For example, LCT-340 from Lewitt for $499 apiece. If you want a pair for free, you just buy their drum mics kit for $939, then sell the other mics from the kit, one by one, and you’ll get your money back, duh.

Percussions

There are many different percussion instruments and all of them have different fundamental frequencies. Some will probably sound good, while others not so. As long as fundamental frequencies aren’t very deep, it should give you an excellent performance. Small tambourines, bells and triangles for instance, will sound fine, although they don’t really require that premium quality of a somewhat costly Shure SM81. For drums or snares and larger tambourines, I don’t recommend it. If you want to accomplish it with an SDC, I would suggest looking into KSM 137 instead, which is also used live.

Features & build

How many times shall we repeat that Shure is capable of making durable things? SM81 is another one of them, and it will work for a decade if you don’t abuse it. The build is rock solid and there isn’t much more to add. The features are as follows, it has a -10 dB pad and two roll off options for low end: gentle 6 dB/octave and aggressive 18 dB/octave. The mic comes with a plastic case, stand clip and wind foam. With the foam on, you can do some outdoor recordings however, it will pick up a lot of environment. Finally, don’t forget that this mic has no internal shock mount and should not be hand-held.

Best Price on Shure SM81-LC

---

Instruments

CAD e70 is best at handling instruments: acoustic guitar, banjo, piano and violin are just a few of the examples that come to mind. I have stumbled on a YouTube video from GarageBand & Beyond that actually demonstrates how it sounds on acoustic guitar without any EQ or compression. It is self-explanatory so just listen and judge for yourself! And if you like this sound, you will probably like it for other instruments as well.

Percussion

CAD e70 also works for percussion, particularly small frame drums and tambourines. It gives you a precise attack without leaving out any details. There is enough brightness if you want, and no it doesn’t sound hyped. The low end is not deep enough for large drums but it is accurate and won’t make your tambourine sound like kick drum. Being a condenser mic, at times it can run hot. But this is not an issue, since all you need to do is to move it closer to the source. CAD e70 has no problems with close miking, especially with pad on, and if needed it is ready to handle a substantial amount of sound pressure.

Overheads

Cymbals and hi-hat performance is just slightly above average. Even though the mic is relatively cheap, it has an excellent transient performance while the frequency response fully extends to 20 kHz. Thus, it is capable of capturing the entire range, with all the subtleties. However, in practice it sounds a bit too bright, and may require a good deal of EQ to balance it out. For cymbals and hi-hat, it is preferable to use higher quality mics with flatter response. A pair of Shure SM81 would accomplish this task much better… But if you cannot afford more expensive overheads, this mic can cut it as a budget option.

Omni capsule

So far, I’ve been referring to the cardioid capsule but it also comes with a separate omnidirectional capsule. This capsule offers a similar amount of brightness though in a slightly different range. There is a bit more raw presence but it is not as airy as the cardioid. It’s not at all gimmicky, as you may think – the quality is just about decent. It will prove quite useful if you want to capture room reverb or ambience. In addition, this can be a great budget solution for recording choirs and orchestra. A pair of e70 in omnidirectional mode will give you a nice sense of depth and spaciousness – for a laughable price.

Noise figures

CAD e70 is rated for 23 dB-A self-noise and 10 mV/Pa sensitivity. There are plenty of both noisier and quieter mics in sub $200 range, so in this regard it can be considered as average. Keep in mind though, quieter mics are not necessarily better sounding and I’d rather use a noisier than a harsher-sounding mic. Comparing to our recently reviewed AKG C1000s, it is actually 2.4 dB quieter when the gain is matched. Comparing to the SM81 mentioned above, it is 2 dB noisier, but it’s actually a bummer for Shure, as it should be even quieter, considering the price.

For home studios and live venues, those figures will be more than enough. When miking instruments at reasonable distance and volume, in other words using it as intended, you won’t hear any hiss or noise whatsoever. The omni capsule is also significantly quieter, so once again it won’t be a problem if you intend recording the ambience of a typical hall. The noise would only reach the threshold of hearing if you were trying to use the directional capsule to capture low volume conversations. Especially from afar while applying lots of gain, but obviously, it is not designed for that.

Features and build

CAD e70 has a nice and solid look, it is lightweight but it feels quite durable. As already mentioned, it comes with two separate capsules. I say this again because in contrast, AKG C1000s uses only single capsule and relies on a cheap looking plastic cap that acts as a polar pattern converter. This really makes me wonder why C1000s is about twice more expensive than e70 – maybe it should be the other way around? Both mics come with wind foams and thread mounts. But behold, e70 also comes with a shock mount, which of course, is only basic… but hell it’s free and it works!

This mic has three-position low cut and pad switches. Low cut can be set at 75 Hz and 150 Hz – both are 6 dB per octave, so it makes a smooth transition. It can be quite useful for close miking to compensate for proximity effect, as well as reducing low frequency machinery noise, such as from air conditioners, etc. The pad options are -10 dB and -20 dB, which I hope does not require explanation. Finally, it relies on phantom power to operate, consuming 2mA @ 48 volts. If powered by digital recorders, it will drain them pretty quickly so plan your production accordingly.

Edit 2019: the original model was reviewed at $99.99 (please note, the older reviews did not include this piece of information). A few years later I see this mic sold for $299, which may look funny but I feel sorry for those who actually paid full price for this somewhat dated model, which is not at all bad but it just wasn’t supposed to compete in this price range. Hence the rating has been adjusted accordingly, also no longer editor’s choice. For other older reviews where the reference price was avoided I’ll try to keep the ratings in regards to price up to date to the best of my ability.

Edit 2020: I see the mic’s price is back the original $200, so I’m going to adjust the rating once again. For this price I don’t know if there are better deals out there, but it certainly works and it’s a good mic to have still, especially if you are afraid to experiment… $300 was overkill though.

Best Price on CAD e70 microphone

---