Comparative remarks between C414 and NT1

[Sabe]

Hi friends of DUC,

I was curious about your thoughts on this:

The AKGC414 is a $700.00 mic (..roughly)
The Rhodes is a $300.00 mic (..roughly)

One would say they are not even in the same category. Especially price tag wise.

But, I recently, tried the NT1 on a Marshall 4x12 cab and was VERY impressed at the sonics of the playback. I have always used a C414 in front of this cab with good results, but I have to say the NT1 was warmer, more depth and subtle highs... So, I then tried the NT1 on a vocal track......same thing, the NT1 produced a better sonic playback. My curiosity has kicked in at this point.

I am using an Aphex 1100a tube mic pre for these comparisons, no comp, no EQ, no limiting, just dry to a track.

I am not one to doodle over expensive gear versus cheap gear because to me the sound is what matters, not the price tag.

My point..? Has anyone compared the two mics, and if so, what were your thoughts..?

I might add, however, the C414 stole the show with an acoustic guitar comparison. The guitar was an old '65 Gibson CW with the same mic pre mentioned above.

Is it possible a C414 doesn't have the depth (particularly in the low end) that an NT1 has..?

This test was also conducted with the C414 bass roll off switch "off" and in the cardiod pattern. The NT1 has no switches or patterns to choose from.

I know these types of discussions are VERY subjective, but this is just too "odd" to not remark about.

[BigRedButton]

Sabe -

(Just a sidenote) Rode is the mic manufacturer, Rhodes was an electric piano by Fender. [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Honestly, the 414 has never been my favorite mic & I'll most likely never have one in my mic locker. Not to say that it's not a great, high quality mic, because it certainly is. However, to me, they tend to be muddy in the upper mids, and I've never been able to get exactly the sound I was looking for.

I've not tried the Rode NT1, but it seems that many DUCkies have had great success with them, and you certainly gotta love the price point.

I think comparing mics to find out which one fits your needs on any given instument is perfectly valid. I don't think that most of us spend enough time experimenting with different mics, and their placement. Pitting two mics together in a cage match, may not really "prove" anything, because, as you stated, it 's all subjective, but hey - this is supposed to be fun!

In comparing the two, I'd probably leave the bass roll off swich "off" on the 414, since the Rode doesn't have one.

Maybe you could post some audio clips of your findings!

[iplaymusicsoftly]

While in studio, I had a chance to use a lot of good mics, and was disappointed every time I tried the c414...how it got to be a fav I'll never know, but maybe I just had access to a bum one? mics can vary from one to the other. My fav Mic is the RE20, never had a bad track with it. but looking over the posts here, I'll probably get a RODE myself first.

YOu can make a Radio Shack Mic sound good, if you know what to do with it! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[DDP]

414's have always sounded very harsh in the high-end to me. maybe this was advantages with analog??
i've been happy with all the rode mics i've used. great value.

[Roy Howell]

Originally posted by BigRedButton:
I've not tried the Rode NT1, but it seems that many DUCkies have had great success with them, and you certainly gotta love the price point.[/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Exactly, BRB. While I'm not a mike expert, all I can say is that my Rode NT1 sounds excellent for miking electric guitar. I also use it to mike acoustic mandolin, and it sounds great to me.

[where02190]

the Rode NTk is a great value fo rthe money.

The C 414B-ULS is a great mic, however it is rare that two sound the same. they are quite delicate, and require some time tweaking placement. However, a good 414 properly placed sounds great.

Compating these two mics however is somewhat moot, they are very different electronically.

Hope this is helpful.

[basschair]

I've got a C414B-ULS and a RODE NTK, and I like them both, for different reasons. Right now, I'm mainly recording voice, and they both accentuate different things. AKGs, at least to me, are very bright (sometimes harsh) mics. The NTK is bright, warm, and VERY sensitive with my setup. Because of the fact that the RODE mics are comparible to mics which are much more expensive, I'd say go with the Rode and save the money for other stuff. If it works for you, and you've got a budget like me, the lower cost is key.

[Sabe]

Thanks guys, all good responses [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

It is looking like, at least in general, our ears are similar in the fact that the C414 is harsh, mid boomy, and bright.

The NT1 on the other hand, is warm, and bright with good depth.

Interesting point you brought up there DDP about the C414 in the analog world. Perhaps there is something to that. I can certainly see the advantage of a bright mic in the analog world to actually defeat tape saturation.

Thanks for all the responses thus far [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[Calvin]

I like the AKG 414, but I always used it on stuff that I wanted to be very present in the mix. I used it on stuff that had lots of treble. I used it mainly on piano, acoustic guitar, and even on a highhat or ride. There are many applications that the 414 is really good at, but I do like different mic's on vocals.