Design and Build

All in all the Lark Max feels like it’s built to last – a very solid kit, unlike most of those flimsier, budget lav mics around there. Each transmitter is a small, rectangular clip-on unit with a metal clip on the back and a stylish woven mesh windscreen. The mics are easy to handle and fairly rugged – the metal mic guard is stronger than the delicate capsules on some rivals even when the same price range is considered. Although it still does use plastic in its design, because obviously you don’t to wear a cement brick on your collar – yet it looks well made and of high quality, so no issues here. The charging case is surprisingly sturdy: it’s like a large AirPods case with new features, and of course it charges the transmitter batteries. And there is an interior pocket for all the cables and a second set of windscreens.

In terms of layout, the receiver is a bit larger than tiny keychain-style units. It has a belt/strap clip and is roughly the size of a camera hot‑shoe (so it can mount on a camera)​. This larger size lets Hollyland pack in an LCD screen, a push/pull dial, a Back button, and a 3.5 mm headphone jack. One minor gripe is that the hot-shoe mount on the receiver only works facing backwards, so on some cameras you may need a 90° adapter. Each transmitter has its own single control button and LEDs, and I found them easy to attach to clothing with the metal clip or included magnetic clips. Overall, the package feels thoughtful and road worthy: the magnets on the transmitters remind those of higher-end gear and I mean the pro lavs, and I also like the dead‑cat windshields that fit just right onto the capsules.

Audio Quality

The Lark Max’s headline feature is definitely its sound. In our tests it delivered warm, clear voice capture with very low noise. Once again, it’s not an exaggeration to say that it’s comparable to higher end lav systems, potentially beating more expensive mics when it comes to audio quality too. Because we’ve already previously reviewed their ‘budget’ model and it left us pleasantly surprised, but this? – This is an even bigger step up! Speech comes through natural and crisp, with no obvious distortion even at higher volumes. I didn’t notice any electronic hiss or tonal colorations. Outdoors, the built-in Environmental noise cancellation does an impressive job: background hums and winds are pulled down significantly so your voice stays more dominant. Even something atrocious like a clunky truck passing by or construction noise in the background in actuality has had quite little impact.

When comparing to a camera’s onboard mics, the difference is night-and-day: even at moderate distances the Lark’s 24-bit/48 kHz recording is consistently clear​. Inside a quiet room or studio, it holds up just as well – the frequency response is broad (Hollyland quotes 70 dB SNR and 128 dB SPL handling), so it picks up subtle nuances without clipping. If anything, voice recordings feel slightly fuller than some competitors. And once again another surprise is that even on noisy city streets or busy events, the mic remains intelligible. We also borrowed it to one of our colleagues who noted when shooting downtown with obstacles, the Lark Max “was able to transmit audio clearly” even without a perfectly clear line of sight. So yeah, overall we find the audio performance to be the Lark Max’s strongest suit – consistent with what others would call solid or even impressively clear​.

Wireless Range and Connectivity

On paper the Lark Max promises a very long range: Hollyland advertises up to 250 m (820 ft) line-of-sight​. In practice you’ll rarely need that much. We tested it up to ~200 ft (outdoors, open area) and didn’t drop the link. I also did a quick research to see how consistent our findings with what other users reports and some user on Amazon even described a live 800+ ft range through walls in a glass building​ – though that was a very favorable case with nothing between transmitter and receiver. Indoors or with obstructions, performance is still very good: DIY Photography measured about 60 m (200 ft) reliable LOS.

The Lark Max uses a 2.4 GHz FHSS (frequency-hopping) wireless link – essentially its own Wi‑Fi channel – rather than Bluetooth or DECT. In congested RF environments this seems robust: Hollyland’s tests showed it handled lots of other 2.4 GHz devices with no major dropouts​. In my trials around Wi-Fi routers and cellphones, I didn’t notice any pops or static unless the transmitters went completely out of sight. That said, unlike some pro UHF systems or military-style links, it can potentially struggle if overwhelmed by 2.4GHz noise. The system does include automatic frequency-hopping to try to avoid conflict, and in practice the solid build seems to handle normal use just fine.

By design the Lark Max offers no Bluetooth output – it won’t act as a Bluetooth headset. All connections to cameras or phones are done via wired cables or adapters. It comes with a suite of cables (TRS for DSLR, Lightning and USB-C for phones, USB-C to computer) so it can plug directly into most devices. On the camera end, the receiver has a 3.5 mm mono output (any mic input or TRRS adapter works). There’s also a convenient headphone jack on the receiver for live monitoring. In short, the connectivity is flexible: you can send the mic audio into a camera, phone, computer, or record internally on the device itself. Just don’t expect any wireless smartphone pairings – you must plug a cable into your device or use the internal recorder for capture.

Controls and Usability

The Lark Max is straightforward to use once you learn the menu. The receiver has a color OLED screen and a dial (plus a touch-sensitive wheel) for navigation. On power-up it auto-pairs with both mics (especially once you open the case lid)​. The main display shows battery levels, volume/gain levels for each mic, active modes (Mono/Stereo/Noise Cancelling) and signal strength. You can tap or turn the dial to change gain on each channel, mute, or activate the ENC noise filter right from the receiver without any app.

Each transmitter also has one multifunction button and lights. You can turn them on/off, mute them, or even start/stop their internal recording directly from the mics themselves​. This is handy for solo shooters, since each talent can control their mic. The menus for mode selection (Mono vs. Stereo vs. Safety Channel mode) are logical. In Stereo mode each mic goes to its own channel (useful for two-talkers). In Safety mode the second channel records the same audio at a lower gain as a backup (useful if someone suddenly shouts). These modes are a nice touch – and yes, it’s the first time we’ve seen gain control on a safety track​. In practice I left it in Stereo mode, but it’s nice to know the backup is there.

Setup is mostly plug‑and‑go. You power up, clip on or pin on the transmitters, and plug the receiver into your camera/phone. The receivers/transmitters remember each other’s sync once paired. If anything is confusing at first, the clear on-screen display and logical options make it easy to figure out. I especially liked that the included charging case automatically pairs the devices as soon as you open it, so you’re ready to go by the time you hand the mics to your presenters​.

Battery Life and Charging

Battery performance on the Lark Max is very solid. Each transmitter’s internal Li-ion battery lasts about 7.5 hours per charge​, and the receiver is rated around 9 hours. In my own shooting, a single day’s worth of use (8+ hours) was easily covered. The charging case is the real multiplier: it holds enough power to recharge both transmitters twice and the receiver once, meaning on the road you essentially have 3 full days of runtime in one pack. It takes roughly 2 hours to fully charge the set in the case.

As a result, we can say that the battery life also makes a very strong point, with 22-hour battery life (counting the case top-ups), it is a pro to be highlighted. To give context, Hollyland’s own blog compares it to DJI’s system: Lark Max’s 7.5h TX per charge beats DJI Mic’s 5.5h, and with the case yields about 15 hours of continuous TX power. Practically speaking, I could shoot all morning on one charge, pop the units back into the case at lunch, and head out again for afternoon interviews. The case is light and has clear LED indicators so you always know when everything is topped off. And btw, if you use the auto-record safety feature, you can even have the mics start recording on boot, so you never miss a take​.

Internal Recording & Safety Features

A unique aspect of the Lark Max is its built-in recording capability. Each transmitter can record locally to its 8GB flash as a backup​. If the wireless link were to drop, you still have your audio on the mic. Transferring those files is easy – just plug the mic into a computer via USB and it appears like a flash drive​. In my tests I recorded to the camera and to the mics simultaneously (the auto-record mode can do this), giving me two identical WAV files to match in post. For professional use especially this safety net is extremely valuable: I bet many would call it a “life saver” to have two copies of audio.

The receiver also offers a dedicated “Safety Channel” mode: this records the same mic signal at a lower gain on channel 2, so if channel 1 clips on a loud outburst, channel 2 can still have a clean take​. This was a first for me on such a small kit and is a clever professional feature. Overall these safety features (dual-track recording and internal backups) give great peace of mind. And it’s not just marketing – in recording some of our samples it has shown how even with a loud noise or partial dropouts, the Lark Max still preserved usable audio on the alternate track.

Practical Use and Performance

In real-world shooting, the Lark Max proved flexible and reliable. Clipping on the tiny mics is simple (the 32 g transmitters are hardly noticed by the wearer) and the magnetic mounts are convenient for shirt, collar or lapel. Switching between on-camera use and phone is just swapping cables; I plugged it into my DSLR for an interview and it worked flawlessly. Out in a busy street, noise cancelling mode made voices pop out of the ambient noise, then tried it in a busy cafe and once again it left me surprised in a good way, so for those who wonder, it’s not just mechanical or machinery noise that it is able to cancel out.

During an event Lark Max’s receivers quickly auto-paired when I opened the case lid – and by the time people had cameras on, the system was synced and ready. The OLED display lets you confirm levels on the fly and I found it handy. Monitoring via headphones was straightforward as well; I could adjust a transmitter’s gain from the receiver while watching input meters. In a wedding shoot, for example, I clipped one mic to the groom, one to the videographer, and got very clean audio on both​. For podcasters or livestreamers, it even works as a ‘USB mic’: if your Zoom calls sound like crap, you’ll find this really impressive as your voice turns crisper and sharper​. Finally, the included carry case is tight and protective, so I could toss it in a camera bag without worrying, integrating it very easy into my typical setups.

Conclusion

After using the Lark Max extensively, I can say it lives up to the buzz. It delivers studio-like audio with very few compromises, at a budget-friendly price. Setup is plug-and-play and the extra safety features like internal recording, safety channel and noise cancel are real-world game‑changers that you usually see implemented this well only in more expensive gear. Leaving us impressed, The Hollyland Lark Max earns its high ratings, and for an average user this is going to translate to no less than simply exceeding expectations​. In short, it’s a standout wireless lavalier system for filmmakers, vloggers, and podcasters alike. Highly recommended for anyone needing reliable two-person audio on a budget!

Best Price on Hollyland Lark Max Wireless

---

Lark M1 features

• Small footprint
  Lark M1 is so small and compact – it’s almost unreal. The nowadays popular Rode Wireless GO looks simply atrocious and bulky in comparison, and provides no real benefit unless paired with an expensive after-market lavalier. Yes, Lark M1 transmitters also weighs almost nothing… you may forget you’re wearing one.
• Rechargeable case
  It comes with a charging case so that your reciever and trasmitters are being charged when not in use. There is a 4-bar LED on the case that shows it’s battery level. Inside the case there are 3 more LEDs for the status of each device. Also, it is barely the size of a computer mouse so it’s very convinient. Aside from the case, each device has its own USB-C port and can be charged separately.
• Furry windshields
  A small but nice addition, the mics have custom windshields that can be snapped on for recording outside, helping to negate the wind noise. They have rubber bands underneath and fit tightly onto the mics.
• Noise reduction
  Clicking the yellow button on a transmitter activates the noise reduction mode while the LED status changes to green. Switching to this mode on one transmitter also broadcasts to another transmitter. It’s quite useful for noisy environment outside as well as indoor HVAC noise such as air-conditioning. Both modes with or without noise reduction are actually clean and are capable of producing a high quality audio regardless.
• Volume control
  There are basically 3 discrete output levels: -0 dB, -6 dB and -12 dB. Simply clicking +/- buttons on the receiver does the adjustment. I personally used it with my computer realtek line-in, input levels adjusted to 100% in sound settings and -0 dB on the device. This gives me a pretty good gain and I’ve never experienced clipping so far.
• Mobile connectivity
  Aside from connecting to cameras and computers via 3.5mm TRS to TRS cord, you can also connect to cellphones using the included TRS to TRRS cord. Lark M1 also comes with two additional cables: TRS to USB-C and TRS to Lightning. Having an Android phone I found the TRS to USB-C is the most convinient method, that allows me to use the remaining 3.5mm output for headphone monitoring.

Sound and quality

The sound quality of Hollyland Lark M1 is very good for a budget wireless lavalier mic. It does lack definition and clarity compared to professional standalone lavaliers, but the audio it produces is just as clean and the self-noise is minimal. For miniature and especially budget mics it’s one of the most important factors that makes all the difference between sounding professional and amatuer, because if the mic is noisy it is not easy to clean up the recording. Lark M1 is not particularly bright, nor does it have a lot of low end, which is why I like applying some EQ. It sounds fine for recording conversations out of the box though and it isn’t overly sensitive or ‘hot’, so it works fine in less than ideal or noisy environments.

Since you get two mics – they can be used in stereo mode, so I decided to make an experiment and record some music from my speakers for testing. Above are the results after tweaking the EQ curve. It actually did quite well, although I shouldn’t recommend it for music or other applications that require a lot of detail and accuracy. It is just to show that it works and it’s not bad, especially for a wireless mic. Now when it comes to price, and considering all the features it provides I would rate its performance as excellent. Hollyland Lark M1 is a tough competitor that comes on top in terms of price, quality and footprint. The only drawback being the transmission distance, which is not as good as some of the previously reviewed mics.

- Reviewed at $129.00

Best Price on Hollyland Lark M1

---

Sound and quality

The overall audio quality you’ll get from this setup will for the largest part depend on the quality of the mics you are using. It does not depend much on the transmitter in this case, since the noise produced by the system itself is much lower than that of any lavalier mic. Therefore the strategy for improving quality comes down to upgrading your mics. Importantly, Rode does give you this option. You can experiment and easily replace your external mic or fall back to built-in. The other two things of interest with Rode Wireless GO II would be – the stability of transmission and susceptibility to radio interference.

Built-in / mic options

Since personally having many options to works with, some of which are quite expensive, I didn’t expect much from the built-in. Also being a mic reviewer I’m usually a bit sceptic whenever the price seems too attractive like in this case with Rode Wireles GO II. However, I was pleasantly surprised as it produced very little noise on it’s own. Sure enough, the built-in here isn’t better than any $50 mic: despite the claimed smooth frequency response you can hear some colour and other imperfections. Yet, because of low self-noise you can easily make quality YouTube videos using it. Let’s hear some samples (keep in mind mpeg compression has been used):

I believe it’s pretty decent for starters. Once again, there may be a some sibilance, a little distortion and a lack in transparent, extended response but it can get the job done. What’s awkward however is the placement. Even though the transmitter is quite small, it still stands out and weighs your shirt down. Therefore it is much better to just buy some cheap $50 plug-in mic even if that doesn’t provide any improvement in sound quality. If you want to improve the sound though, aiming for professional audio, just get yourself a quality lavalier. For instance you could use Sennheiser MKE 2, available on Amazon – it has a compatible connector.

Wireless signal & interference

The claimed range for this system is actually a whooping 200 meters, although in reality this would need a perfect weather, open space and direct line of sight. So what happens is, other wireless devices as well as different circumstances may affect the range. Having concrete walls between the receiver and transmitter is what usually greatly inhibits the range. But thinking of it, it’s not like you could possibly film someone behind a concrete anyway. Still, the distance is impressive and the signal propagates much further than any wi-fi router.

Having some range allowance is also beneficial as it converts to signal stability and reduces the probability of dropout. I have not personally tested the maximum range, but the reviewer in the video claims that both Wireless GO and GO II proximately worked up to same range of around 150 meters, while the range of latter was only slightly superior. As for EMI, I haven’t experienced any, even after boosting the audio and specifically checking for it. It is important however to make sure you are using the right cable.

If an external mic has a modular cable, then using a wrong one, e.g. TRRS-TRS instead of TRS-TRS or even TRRS-TRRS or vice-versa… or plugging the wrong end could inevitably lead to RF interference simply because different cables wire the ground (or shielding) differently.

Wireless GO vs Wireless GO II

As mentioned, both have the same audio quality. The only difference is in added features and functionality. If you don’t need that functionality then you could as well just buy the first generation, provided you can buy them cheaper. I will leave that up to you to decide, but personally I would choose GO II simply because of the on-board recorder.

GO II can record up to 40 hours of 24-bit audio. Which means you don’t need a Zoom recorder anymore, besides it is much more compact than previously popular Zoom recorders. The idea of using a recorder is that you get a better quality audio than when plugging into a phone or camera. The drawback is having to sync audio later, but the improvement is worthwhile especially for cellphones.

Wireless GO II features:

• Wireless GO II has a connectivity to a Rode Central app where you can access features and settings. In contrast, Wireless GO does not have this functionality.
• It has an on-board recorder, storing up to 40 hours of audio.
• The availability of Safety channel or stereo mode.
• Safety channel outputs -20 dB padded audio in a secondary channel, which you can fall back to in case of clipping.
• The stereo mode allows recording from two channels or transmitters simultaneously.
• Wireless GO II claims improved transmission stability and range.
• It has a flexibility of gain control, which can be tuned by small increments.

* If you’ve looked at the pictures of GO II, you will usually see two (2) transmitters:
Makes perfect sense… however, if you don’t need two transmitters for some reason – there is another option to buy Rode GO II with a single transmitter, which is also available on amazon. Just do some search and maybe you would be able to save money.

Overall design

By glancing at the pictures, it is easy to miss just how small and compact the whole system is. Go ahead and measure it – it’s just a size of a matchbox! Needless to say, its footprint is miniscule, in fact it is the smallest professional wireless transmitter and receiver pair that I know of. Rode Wireless GO II also scores high in terms of durability, the only moving parts there are the hinges and they are well protected. Other than that, it is comparable to a cellphone. It has a very responsive, color display that shows when you might be clipping or about to clip. The screen is glued to the body in a similar manner, which prevents water getting through. Not waterproof but water-resistant for sure.

Same applies to internal batteries. It supports quick charging just like your cellphone, and I guess the life-expectancy of a battery should be similar too. What I mean by that, well I can recall my Samsung S8 battery started to deteriorate after 4 years of daily use, which translates to almost 1500 charge-discharge cycles. If you don’t use it daily, it could potentially work for a decade. However, in an unlucky scenario things could still go wrong so that you would need a battery replacement. And there is no easy way of doing that, other than sending the mic back to Rode for battery replacement. This might be the only con so far, otherwise it’s almost perfect.

- Reviewed at $263.24

Best Price on Rode Wireless GO II

---

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

Sound & quality

Although the receiver and transmitters do contribute to the sound quality, we are going to focus on the mics while treating the system as one, since the mics inside the receivers are non-replaceable. In terms of frequency response, it lives up to the claim: covering the range from 100Hz to 10Khz it proves more than enough to reproduce a human voice. The EQ is just about right, not too bright nor mellow – provided you attach it on your collar and use it for vocal recording only. Voical Lark will also mix two channels into one when using both mics, which also eliminates the need for post processing, so you can immediately upload your videos.

However, this is a poor choice for those who like more flexibility. There should be an option to output both channels separately as stereo, since it is using a TRRS connector, which has this capability. Only a mentally challenged user could possibly underappreciate such a feature. Any even barely sane sound engineer would consider this a must. Especially, when you pay almost $200 for such a device. And to my surprise there is no option to adjust each mic’s volume individually in the mix. Sure, you could assume the volume to be roughly the same (considering both persons wear it as instructed), but this is a strong assumption.

Of course, it isn’t that bad unless you are frequently miking interviews. For someone who just does occasional blogging it could be just fine. And the second transmitter is always nice to have as a backup, especially if the battery runs out and you have to keep recording. Occasionally, when you want to record two persons, it would still produce much better results than when using a single mic – that’s for sure. It might be worth noting that the monitoring output on the receiver is very beefy. It drove my 16 Ohm Beyerdynamic headphones very easily, to the point where I thought I might blow them up, and it did preserve all the low end too.

These functionality nuances got me a little carried away. What’s more important, when reviewing Pixel Voical Lark, is to understand what kind of mics are being used there. Most definitely those are front address, small lavalier mics inside the transmitters. Also known as lapel mics. While for the most part, they do sound quite fine, in the absence of sound they start producing a lot of self-noise. This is a well-known problem of any mic in this class. While professional mics, for example, Tram, DPA, Sanken, Countryman, etc, still produce audible noise, it is just about tolerable. The consumer lavaliers are generally horrible in this regard.

In a nutshell, lavs are generally noisy, in a quiet setting they record sounds that do not exist. It first, it may resemble the ambience but if you were to switch to Tram TR50 for instance, all those weird noises would be gone, and only some gentle rustling would remain. If I were to guess the actual quality of the mics used here in regards to noise, I would say they sound like $50 lav mics. Let me reiterate that as follows: you can buy a $50 mic (with a wire) that will sound exactly the same as the $200 system [only without noise reduction]. Sure enough, you can’t fit a pair of Trams in there for this price. But consumers are generally pretty bad at math. Because they’ve spend $200 on the system, they may often expect it to sound like a $200 microphone, oh yes and with the noise that of an LDC.

Therefore, not everyone’s expectations are going to be met here. This isn’t just specific to Pixel Voical Lark, but to any other products in this price range too. Unless you buy a processional lavalier worth around $300, that is, only for the mic – you will find yourself pretty much screwed when it comes to self-noise. The actual self-noise of Voical Lark is unclear, the spec says it’s 79 dbA SNR, but this makes no sense because a professional TR50 is only 68 dbA for instance. In reality, my wild guess it’s at best 58, though no one really knows. Maybe eventually someone will measure it but I don’t have the necessary equipment. The transmitter could also be contributing to the noise spectre.

The good news, it is only crucial in a quiet setting while outside it’s generally not at all an issue. And another good news is that we have the noise reduction mode. Naturally, it does what it does, but at the same time it also reduces the mic’s self-noise. So in the end, a clever post-processing gives us a clean audio without the need of using an expensive, professional lavalier. The downside of noise-reduction is that it smooths out some details that could be of interest. For instance, someone who records ASMR, wants to keep all those chewing ‘noises’ and do not want them reduced. Voical Lark isn’t very sensitive either for the purpose of ASMR recording.

Pixel Lark X sample

Here is the actual recording sample. In the first part you can hear the background noise, which is just mostly the self-noise. There is no HVAC running, only a computer. The second part is the same environment but with the noise-reduction mode on. As you can hear, the difference is tremendous. If I were to make a Vlog or Youtube video at home, I would most definitely use the noise reduction setting. There is a possibility of occasionally jumbling some details but overall it sounds more professional. The recording has been done via SSL2+ in 24 bits lossless format. ’4k’ mode was used, which adds a little brightness, though I think it wasn’t even necessary.

Design & durability

Now that I’ve thoroughly covered the mic, it’s time to mention a few things about the wireless system itself. Although I haven’t used it much, the battery never ran out while testing and the charging box has plenty of charge left. According to the specifications, the battery used in Voical Lark box is ‘Lithium Ion Po’, and it follows the latest charging protocols QC 2.0 and PD 3.0, so expect the same charging speeds as your modern smartphone. The range of the system isn’t particularly great, 20 meters in line of sight is just about mediocre, compared to other wireless systems such as Rode GO II’s 200 meters range. When there is a concrete wall between the receiver and transmitter, you must use the provided antennas or you may lose signal.

Definitely, there are plenty of uses for Pixel Voical Lark that take those factors into account. For instance, you could be filming yourself doing some yoga, a couple meters away from the camera. This is totally fine. Especially if you like the minimal footprint and don’t want to wear a bodypack, just clip on the mic transmitter onto your bikini and you are all set. Hope this is a good enough example. However, a bad idea if you are filming in a large hall, moving far away from the camera and have lots of other wireless devices that could potentially interfere with a rather weak transmitter of Voical Lark. Do not use for what it’s not intended! Also note that you will have no option to upgrade, unlike with bodypacks where you could eventually plug a more expensive lavalier.

In terms of durability, I would say it’s about average. The receiver has an aluminium shell, so it’s not just plastic. Same goes for the charger box, so once you put the components inside there, they are pretty much protected. Nevertheless, I have identified some of the weaker parts, of which you should be mindful. Those are mainly hinges of the clips. For the transmitters they are probably fine, unless you accidentally step on them. For the receiver the hinges are a bit thicker, which is good but the attachment of cold-shoe to the hinge is a horrible design as it puts lateral strain on the hinge. The plastic base doesn’t hold the receiver tight enough for my liking. Should be fine atop of a camera in a horizontal position but attaching to your belt could be risky.

- Reviewed at $199.99

Best Price on Pixel Voical Lark X

---

What do we have here?

DTP Beat Kit Pro 7 comes in a sturdy black road case with an eccentric label that reads – “Sounds like Lewitt”. In the top compartment you will find one DTP 640 REX, a unique dual element kick drum, and a special splitter cable to access each of them separately. Then there lie four dynamic mics, three supercardioid DTP 340 TT and one cardioid MTP 440 DM. Those mics are meant for the tom toms and the snare respectively. For overheads, there is a pair of LCT 340 with cardioid capsules and foam windshields. The omnidirectional capsules are not included in this particular kit.

On the second level of the case, you will find the following mounting accessories. Five DTP 40 MTS rubber shock mounts, three for the toms and two for the overheads. For the snare mic there is a different MTP 40 MCS, handheld-style shock mount, and the kick mic doesn’t need any. Finally, the kit includes four DTP 40 MT rim mounts for the toms and the snare. Therefore, all you need is a decent drum set, two overhead stands, a kick drum stand and you are set. The quality of the accessories is great; they hold well and don’t loosen. In case you need a replacement, they are cheap as well!

DTP 640 REX review

This drum mic combines two phase-matched cardioid capsules in one housing. First capsule is dynamic and the second one is electret condenser. Although both of them offer a full spectrum linear frequency response, the condenser element excels at producing a rich, quality low end while the dynamic element makes for a more expressive drum attack. Moreover, Lewitt DTP 640 REX has three EQ settings and two pad attenuators, so it’s a very versatile mic. It can be used for something like double bass or bass cabinets but first of all it is a kick drum mic, so let’s talk more about its performance in that vein.

The rich low end response of this mic actually lives up to the hype. Its condenser component goes as low as 20 Hz and remains incredibly clean yet powerful… enough to shake the walls! Of course, you will need some decent acoustics, huge hifi monitors and a good power amplifier in order to appreciate its full potential, but even without all this, it’s just hard not to notice how much better it is at reproducing the low-end component of any given kick drum, compared to dynamic mics. And what’s especially great is the absence of color and resonances, so on that part, it will work equally well for drums of any size.

But what about the attack of the DTP 640 REX? Well, the dynamic capsule has a neutral response. It’s not as bright and hyped as most other mics, yet still gives you lots of detail and clarity. It sounds very much natural and realistic, however if you have a shitty drum, it may also sound shitty. If you are after a scooped mid-range sound of Audix D6 and similar mics, you can set the EQ switch in the third position and it will do just that. In the second position, it will only boost the attack and sound similar to Beta 52A. I personally didn’t find myself using those filters but the flat mode gave me the ideal sound I was after.

DTP 340 TT for toms

Lewitt DTP 340 TT’s are dynamic tom tom mics with a supercardioid pattern. This pattern helps to eliminate the bleed while increasing their feedback resistance. At the same time, the mic takes advantage of the proximity effect for achieving a deeper and more substantial sound. What’s important is that they sound fat without being particularly annoying. They produce a punchy attack and sound very crispy on the high end as well. There is a decent amount of brightness while the mids are gently scooped out. This makes them very effective in the mix for tom toms and percussion instruments in general.

MTP 440 DM for snare

MTP 440 DM may be an inexpensive mic, but comparing it to a Shure SM57 is like comparing a Cheops Pyramid to a pile of dung, or sort of. The Lewitt’s mic is less resonant, smoother and more resistant to feedback, and produces a higher output as well. The midrange is far more stable and so is the low end, which also extends a bit lower. You may not necessarily need all this for getting a decent snare sound but try comparing vocals and you will be amazed by the difference! Finally, MTP 440 DM is far crispier than the SM57. Not as bright though, but the overheads would usually brighten it up a bit.

LCT 340 for overheads

Lewitt LCT 340 are probably ones of the best overhead mics in the industry. Among others, they beat the legendary Shure SM81 and Sennheiser e914, not to mention the cheaper mics. But do not be surprised! They are actually quite expensive and sell $499 a piece. And this drum kit includes a matched pair, which is just unbelievable considering the price. So yeah, as I said, it is actually worth buying this kit for those overheads alone. The only caveat is that they don’t include the omni capsules, but you can live with that, don’t you? Anyway, for drum overheads it is much easier to use cardioids than omni.

So what’s the big deal about LCT 340, and how are they different? Unlike most other instrument mics, they are externally polarized. This gives them an advantage over the more common electret condensers as being a bit more flexible. Those mics have a decent sensitivity, relatively low self-noise and high SNR and wide dynamic range. The frequency pattern is also notably flat, which is important for the overheads because you don’t want to color the cymbals. There is only a touch of added brightness but the higher end is very smooth and it captures all the details and subtleties without adding any harshness.

Not only are the mics incredibility crisp, they also boast having a very accurate low end and mid-range. And if you don’t need the low end, there are three switchable low cut filters at your disposal. The pad attenuators are very flexible too; you can adjust for 6 dB, 12 dB and 18 dB depending on how close they are to the source and how loud is it. Aside from the overheads, those mics will excel with stringed instruments, pianos, different percussions and what not. So if you happened to be the lucky owner of the Lewitt LCT 340’s, be prepared when your fellow musicians ask you to borrow them for a while…

Conclusion

Is it really worth buying the Lewitt DTP Beat Kit Pro 7? Nope, just buy the above mics individually and forget about Amazon, so you will pay the full retail price as well. Let’s see now just for the lulz, how much that would cost you. DTP 640 REX – $399, DTP 340 TT – $105 x 3, LCT 340 – $629 x 2, MTP 440 DM – $119. Total of only $2,091 (excluding the accessories). So yeah, don’t you ever buy this kit! I’m just kidding… For the price they are selling it, I think it’s a no-brainer. Last year we have reviewed the Audix DP7 in a similar price range and it was great, but the DTP Beat Kit Pro 7 obviously beats it hands down.

Best Price on DTP Beat Kit Pro 7

---

What’s in the box

• Microphones:
• Accessories:
• 1x PGA52 for kick drum
• 3x A25D clips
• 3x PGA56 for toms
• 3x AP56DM rim mounts
• 1x PGA57 for snare
• 7x C15J 15 foot (4.6 m) XLR cables
• 2x PGA81 for overheads
• 1x 95F16526 carrying case

Shure PGA52 review / kick drum

The new kick mic from Shure is an ass-kicker! We’ve been used to their Beta 52a for over a decade and all agreed that it was a great mic, although it did have its own distinctive sound that many people would disfavor. Particularly, it sounded too deep and no matter how positioned, it just couldn’t be flexible enough to accommodate for different playing styles and especially smaller size drums. The rock music would sound richer and fuller but the jazz would become unbearable. Adding up, that loud and clean attack of Beta was put together well, but in terms of freq. response and naturalness, it could have had more balance.

Shure PGA52 and Beta52a, although sharing the same series number are actually two completely different mics with different capsules. PGA52 is lighter, it has more gain / sensitivity and the sound is unbelievable – nothing like the old model! This time Shure has brought up a better-balanced attack while also tuning the lower range… The bass part is now nicely defined and has a more appropriate frequency peak (76 Hz). Overall, not only did the sound improve and became more natural, it has actually gained much more flexibility for the use in various kinds of setups!

It was really amazing to see it working equally awesome for both a noisy metal band with 24” and a calm pop drummer on a different 20” kick drum. The trick was partly about positioning; depending on the placement, we were able to get some good combinations of sharpness and depth. Other kick drum mics hardly offer such flexibility – usually there is only a single position where the sound is OK and anything else results in something harsh or unnatural. On the other hand, PGA52 seems to have that very good balance right from the start – and that’s the other part of the trick.

Shure PGA56 review / toms

PGA56 sounds kind of similar to SM57 on high toms and gets the job done just fine. Although it is a relatively cheap mic, I find it that tom mics do not actually have to be expensive in order to sound decent (unlike the overheads), so I really cannot complain. Yes, there are certainly better models out there, for example my favorite Sennheiser MD421. However, very few can afford it and since we are reviewing a budget set, such comparisons are irrelevant. On the other hand, many mics are worse, and I am glad that PGA56 sounds pretty natural without being congested or ringy like some others.

On low tom, PGA56 sounds even better, wider and clearer – a bit better than I thought it would. I like it more than SM57, which tends to add some strange cloudy midrange, but still it is not as good as the original Beta 56a. No wonder the old Beta still rocks, as it is more than twice as expensive! Like the new kick mic, PGA56 has some good amount of gain and a nice looking design. The rim mounts that come along with those are very convenient. You can quickly set them up and remove without any issues. I wish all my microphones had the mounts like these!

Shure PGA57 for snare

PGA57 has a smooth frequency pattern and it’s capable of providing natural sound with good amount of detail – and that is quite very important for snares. It has a gently fading low frequency roll off, which I find more appropriate than the original SM57. The mid-range is transmitted beautifully but I find it lacking the crispiness comparing to professional models. However, the extended response isn’t considered a big deal for snares, as there are mostly only subtle harmonics… As long as it has natural mids and upper-mids, you get a very satisfying sound for the price.

Shure PGA81 as overheads

PGA81 turned out to be another pleasant surprise –these are excellent overheads for those who cannot afford the original SM81 that cost 3 times as more. Those condensers are just as crisp and offer a nice transient response due to their diaphragm size. The frequency pattern is similar, still somewhat smooth but not flat. For instruments, this could have made a difference; for overheads, this isn’t that crucial. In fact, you will not notice any audible difference between this and professional models, so unless you are very picky and do a lot of professional recording, you won’t find any reason not to love those new Shure’s overheads.

Overall

Overall, those are very great mics and what’s most important is they have an unbeatable price. There is no deceit – PG Alta is a very recent release and as the trend goes, new models generally cost less to produce. Every single piece included in this set is actually good by itself (especially that amazing kick drum and the overheads), so you can be assured of a quality sound. Each mic also comes with its own wire and mounting tool, which is a nice and thrifty addition. Setting it up is a breeze and once locked, nothing ever goes loose – a pleasure to work with in all aspects!

Best Price on Shure PGADRUMKIT7

---

Package

CAD Audio Touring7 is obviously designed for 7-piece drum set. It is pretty much standard, with the only exception that it has four mics of exact same type for capturing three different toms and a snare drum. So, the package contains 1x D12 as a kick mic, 4x TSM411 for toms / snare, 2x GXL 1200 for overheads and a soft case to carry them around. Then, you also get four pieces of mounting clips –quite cheap but they do hold well.

Sound & Quality

This set relies heavily on TSM411, which is used for floor toms, rack toms and a snare. Those drums produce different sounds covering low to middle frequencies, so they are usually miked with different pieces of equipment. For instance, Audio Technica sets use three different mics for this purpose and that gives them a bit of advantage. Touring7 here is inferior in terms of quality, but on practice, that difference isn’t big.

TSM411 does an amazing job on toms as it offers a lot of clarity along with balanced lows. For a snare drum though, it may sound kind of hollow. SM57 in this case is more accurate and simply better to my ears. However, TSM411 does offer a better sound rejection due to a super-cardioid pattern, so even at the price of under $50 it remains a tough competitor and a viable choice for many. The more directional pick-up pattern is also one of the reasons why this set does so well for live gigs.

D12 made for kick drums is equally as important. An unadjusted kick mic can easily ruin the whole setup and there’s a number of things can possibly go wrong. Fortunately, CAD did not disappoint us and brought another decent mic, which is in line with the rest of their products – cheap looking but good sounding. It features a crispy and accurate click, which I like to emphasize even more with a bit of EQ. The bass part is more solid, though it mainly suits medium and small kick drums. On larger drums, you may find it lacking that depth.

GXL1200 is a more common model from CAD Audio – a pencil mic that also finds some general uses such as stereo miking. It is bloody cheap and I’d say has only average quality. The frequency response is a bit shaky at the upper end, and as a pencil mic, it can be considered as ‘noisy’. However, it does pretty well for overheads, and on stage, those small issues would never be noticed anyway. To put it simply, if you need cheap tools that work – I could easily recommend this model.

Conclusion

TOURING7 is a set of cheap but good mics where you are offered 7 pieces for a price of one. CAD Audio is best at producing budget mics that may look terrible yet still offer a great performance. Like all budget sets, it does have its own minor issues but overall it has a great sound quality. Four mics in this set are supercardioid, and this makes a big deal in sound rejection, which is so much needed for live performance. A well-made set that performs far better than you would expect!

Best Price on Cad Audio Touring7

---

Foreword

When it comes to drum mics bundles, there are usually two pitfalls:

Manufacturers naturally want to maximize their sales, so they create all kinds of bundles out of their existing models. In reality, such mics have a broader use and aren’t necessarily honed for drums. Thus despite the overall mic quality, you may often discover a lack of the necessary edge for that application. On the other hand, some manufacturers start inventing a whole range of new models to accommodate for different drums. The caveat here is that often what comes out is but a bunch of generic models that may be good but not good enough…

The package

Now, with DP7 you actually avoid both of those problems. Audix among other things does specialize on drum miking and each included model is well thought of. Those mics can be purchased individually and many people order them. This is also a good thing because if you lose one, you don’t have to worry about finding a replacement. However, if you bought them separately they would cost you much higher, around $1,100 just for the mics. That is excluding the aluminum case and mounting accessories.

Talking about accessories, they don’t have any issues that are so prevalent among similar mic bundles. The clips are hard to break but easy to mount. They sit well on pretty much any drum kit, never going loose during performance and that’s a great thing. Here are the mics that are included in the package: D6 (kick drum), D4 (floor tom), 2x D2 (rack toms), 2x ADX51 (overheads) and I5 (snare). I shall now describe them one by one and afterwards share my overall impression of the set.

D6

The kick drum is the foundation of any drum set so this mic would be a most important piece. D6 is specced for 144 SPL, which is lower than majority of kick mics, yet in reality it doesn’t produce any noticeable distortion even during aggressive play. On contrary, this mic works wonders with rock and heavy metal music. It has a punchy attack sound that easily cuts through without being harsh or obtrusive. The low end is tight and both ends sound slightly more detailed than AKG112 or Beta52a. Overall, this is a great mic and it can sound nice out of the box.

D4 & D2

Audix D4 is meant for a floor tom; it is a way smaller than D6 yet it still brings a significant low end. A versatile mic, also perfectly suited for smaller kick drums. The sound is tight and clean, and has a distinctive “oomph” to it, but no mud whatsoever! Audix D2 add more body and warmth for rack toms – in my opinion they aren’t as great as D4 but still of high enough quality and they get the job done. Both mics are hypercardioid and have an excellent off-axis rejection.

ADX51 & I5

ADX51 are used as an overhead pair. Those lightweight, small diaphragm pencil mics produce clear and accurate highs, which won’t go wrong with any kind of setup. To be honest, I didn’t expect much from this pair but it turned out very decent. Finally, Audix I5 is an all-around mic that is very similar to SM57. Both mics work equally well for the snares and considered industry standard. I5 is maybe a tiny bit brighter but you won’t hear the difference.

Overall

Audix DP7 is an excellent bundle, not only for the quality but also for the price. With this kit, you can get that good sound without having much to worry about the EQ, compressors and other advanced stuff. All of those mics are time-proven and they make an excellent match. Durability is another nice addition – they are quite hardy, especially the D-series. Then a good road case makes them impossible to break while on tours. Even the mounting is a breeze (maybe except for D6) so I can’t recommend them more highly!

Best Price on Audix DP7

---

Setup

Samson 8kit will work with pretty much any 8-piece drum set. This usually implies a snare, bass drum, 3 toms, 2 cymbals and a hi-hat. Each piece is served with a corresponding mic type, so you get the following models respectively: Q-Snare, Q-Kick, 3x Q-Toms, 2x CO1 for cymbals / overheads and C02H for hi-hat. They are easy to mount onto an existing drum set and this does not require any additional mic stands. However, the mounting system is underlooked in terms of durability. Clips may eventually break off so be prepared to improvise.

Sound & quality

In a drum set, all pieces are more or less equally important. However, when it comes to miking, some are more demanding than others are. First of all, this applies to the bass drum, so let’s start with Q-Kick. That mic model is relatively cheap and unknown… yet surprisingly it does an amazing job. I was actually expecting to hear something bland and tasteless as of a typical, cheap kick drum mic, but it was nothing like that! Perhaps, it is not as dynamic as AKG112 but it sounds briskly and never muffled. It has a sharp and stunning attack. The low frequency peak is lower and results in a deeper kick as well. Where AKG112 may sound thin, this thing will actually shine. It may take you some time to adjust for the best position but in the end, you will love how it sounds!

The pair of overhead LDCs is also remarkable – vivid, crisp, dynamic… I really find those CO1’s excelling at capturing cymbals after comparing it with a number of good and not so good models. Yet it’s still hard to believe that you get them as a part of 8-piece set! For reference a single LDC of a good quality would alone cost as much as $150-200. Maybe they aren’t that good for singing, but they are excellent overheads! Enough said. As for the rest of the pieces, I don’t have much to say except that they do mix well. Toms sound just as good as I wanted to and even the snare is terrific. I would certainly recommend them again and again!

Conclusion

Samson 8kit will probably satisfy even the choosy musicians with its above par sound quality, so do not think of it as just another cheap set, but rather consider low price as a bonus. Overall, the mics themselves are somewhat sturdy and relatively durable. The only problem is the mounting, which is unfortunately flawed. For studio use, this is not a big issue, but for live performance, some will find it problematic. We haven’t been using them for long and the mounting was still intact. However, it did look somewhat flimsy and from what other people say – they do break often. Personally, I would not want to mess around fitting them with tape, especially outside studio walls. Reliability is what they lack… Otherwise this would get a solid 10/10 score.

- Reviewed at $299

Best Price on Samson 8kit

---

Sound & quality

Considering the price of the package, you will be pleasantly surprised with the outcome. For toms and snares, the 57s sound nothing short of amazing, clean and accurate, needing little to no EQ. These mics are unpretentious, very easy to set up and require no magic whatsoever. Just clamp them on and you are ready to go. They work great for both studio recording and live performance, so you can carry them around. Although fairly inexpensive, SM57 can deliver a sound that is very close to high end. It may not be the perfect choice for a singer, but when it comes to drums you won’t find any better without doubling or tripling your investment, which will also scale with the number of drums.

Beta-52A is not a joke either. It delivers a lively, profound bass without sacrificing the clarity of the attack. The sound has a lot of presence and it is very well balanced. According to specifications, it can also handle the sound pressure of up to 174 dB, which is an insane amount. You simply would never get it overloaded even if you wanted to. Other than that, it has an in-built pneumatic shock mount that helps eliminating extraneous vibration and mechanical noise. Aside from kick drums, it makes a fantastic mic for bass cabs with a sound ‘n kicking low-end.

Build & setup

Both models are very durable and using hardened steel, they are actually hard to break. There is no hype in saying those mics can work for a decade as long as you shake off the dust. This is quite common for Shure’s microphones, and I wouldn’t expect any less. Clamps that come with the kit also seem to be of high quality. They are branded and are sold $40 apiece. Just google for Shure A56D and see some actual pictures. With this mounting system, you can fasten them on any kind of stands and this gives a bit of freedom. For a kick drum, you may need a small boom stand though, but it’s also possible to improvise.

Ideally, this kit is designed for a 4-piece drum set and it requires one or two overhead mics to capture the cymbals. For an overhead, any decent condenser mic with a cardioid pattern should usually do the trick. For those who like premium, I can particularly recommend a pair of Audio-Technica ATM450. Now, if you don’t mind a little bit of bleed, it is also possible to record a 5-piece set while capturing two high toms with one of the 57s. Finally, you can even set it up without overheads so as to capture cymbals as well, but I would never recommend it as other than a temporary solution.

Conclusion

When it comes to 4-piece drum sets, unarguably, Shure DMK57-52 is a beast. With its great sound quality, it comes very close to the high end while retaining a cheap price. Think of it, if you bought those items one by one, it would cost you $100 x 3 for SM57, $200 for Beta-52A and $40 x 3 for the clamps, which is over $600. That is why for the price they sell it for, many would consider it a steal. Whether you are a professional or a beginner drummer, you’ll never get disappointed with this choice even if you do have higher standards for gear, and especially if on a budget.

Best Price on Shure DMK57-52 Microphone Kit

---