TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Rode NT2000 vs NT2-A

Rode NT2000 vs NT2-A

Could you guys please shed some light on these microphones from your experiences or from what you have heard about them?

I am looking for a fairly solid mic that is good for recording vocals. At this point, I am not too sure if I am looking more for a warm feel or a more present, crisp sound. A mic in the $300-450 price range is preferred, but not mandatory.

Also, if you can recommend why another type of mic is better and justify your opinion, then that would be appreciated as well.

Re: Rode NT2000 vs NT2-A

quote:

Originally posted by phantom limb Could you guys please shed some light on these microphones from your experiences or from what you have heard about them? I am looking for a fairly solid mic that is good for recording vocals. At this point, I am not too sure if I am looking more for a warm feel or a more present, crisp sound. A mic in the $300-450 price range is preferred, but not mandatory. Also, if you can recommend why another type of mic is better and justify your opinion, then that would be appreciated as well.

i can't say i have a lot of experience working with mics, but most people have advised me that it is better to have a number of mics to choose from, rather than one "super mic". a few people have suggested a b1, nt1-a and sm57. this way you have two condensors and a dynamic, so you have a reasonable range of characters.

a dynamic mic will generally have more volume in the treble. a condenser will have a warmer sound which brings out the midrange.

i have a rode ntg-1 and it sounds even across the whole audible spectrum. but i havent used it for music vocals so i cant tell you how it sounds

Re: Re: Rode NT2000 vs NT2-A

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm i can't say i have a lot of experience working with mics, but most people have advised me that it is better to have a number of mics to choose from, rather than one "super mic". a few people have suggested a b1, nt1-a and sm57. this way you have two condensors and a dynamic, so you have a reasonable range of characters.

Alright, I see what you're trying to convey. I am comforted by the idea of a "super mic," which needs some side-kicks. So Studio Projects B1 and Shure SM57 is what you're implying, correct?

quote:

Originally posted by camsr a dynamic mic will generally have more volume in the treble. a condenser will have a warmer sound which brings out the midrange. i have a rode ntg-1 and it sounds even across the whole audible spectrum. but i havent used it for music vocals so i cant tell you how it sounds

Ok. Thanks for clarifying those concepts for me. Are shotgun mics a bad idea for vocals? .

^^ Yes.

Between the 2 mics, I would definitely get the NT-2000 if you can afford the extra few bucks. I've used the NT-2A dozens of times and have always been pleased with the results. Rode mics tend to be really good at recording exactly what you're hearing, rather than adding color to "make it sound good". So what goes in is what you get.



P.S. - Condenser mics don't sound "warmer" than dynamic mics. Because of the diaphragms in each mic, obviously the condenser mic is much more sensitive to sounds than a dynamic mic. That doesn't necessarily mean that the condenser mic will sound more full or have more low end or will feel "warmer". A dynamic mic can just as easily get the same results.

quote:

Originally posted by phantom limb Are shotgun mics a bad idea for vocals? .

Yes.

The Rode mics are nice. Unfortunately, I've had very little experience with the two that you are considering, but I have used an NTK and an NT1A extensively. My two main mics for recording vox (I work with 7 female singers) are the Rode NTK and the AKG C414. The NTK is a great mic, but the stock Russian tube that comes with it can be a little harsh sounding in the higher frequencies. I replaced it with an Ei tube and that smoothed out the highs considerably. If you can afford it, I'd definitely consider that mic. The C414 costs quite a bit more, but is even warmer/smoother, even though it's not a tube mic.

If you are also going to buy a dynamic mic for recording vocals, I would go with the SM58 over the SM57. Shure designed the SM57 to be more of an instrument mic, whereas the SM58 is more or less the industry standard for vocals (esp. live). A Beta 58 would be an even better choice.

I personally love every mic Rode has ever done. My alltime favourite is the original NT-2 (own 2 of em), which was more or less a copy of the Neumann U-87.
The new NT-2A continues this approach but it is a much more "original" mic. It really supports rock and pop vocals, and I would use it a lot for female trance vocalists.

The NT-2000 is more allround, more aimed towards the "multi-usage mic". It is more neutral, and does less boosting in the upper midrange. If you EQ it, you can easily make it sound NT-2Aish

I would recommend if you primarily plan to record Vocals, take the NT-2A if you want to record other stuff (Guitars, Drums, you name it), too, take NT-2000.

In the end, both are decent mics and you won�t regret the purchase !

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Cache I personally love every mic Rode has ever done. My alltime favourite is the original NT-2 (own 2 of em), which was more or less a copy of the Neumann U-87. The new NT-2A continues this approach but it is a much more "original" mic. It really supports rock and pop vocals, and I would use it a lot for female trance vocalists. The NT-2000 is more allround, more aimed towards the "multi-usage mic". It is more neutral, and does less boosting in the upper midrange. If you EQ it, you can easily make it sound NT-2Aish Really good advice. I would recommend if you primarily plan to record Vocals, take the NT-2A if you want to record other stuff (Guitars, Drums, you name it), too, take NT-2000. In the end, both are decent mics and you won�t regret the purchase !

Rode mics are probably the best on the market in terms of value but I've never found any of their mics particully "warm" sounding (even the valve ones). That's not a bad thing just, that if you are looking for a really "warm" sound you will probably struggle to get it from a rode mic.

my opinion is that if you're looking for a valve mic, don't go cheap because it will ultimately sound cheap. What I mean by this is that if you have the sort of money to buy a cheap valve mic, it will be much better spent on a mid range condenser than a bottom range valve mic.

The AKG C414 is really, really great mic for various applications and for vocals but is quite expensive. Have a look at the AKG 3000B, which is based (in terms of the diaphragm) on the C414 but is considerably (about 50%) less expensive. It's pretty rugged too and has a warmer sound than most condensers.

Stay the hell away from SM58's and 57's - they are probably one of the most rugged mics in production (I have actually used one as a drum before) but god do they sound like shit.
They are really for stage use (and even then I'd only give them to backing singers) I would avoid using them in the studio wherever possible as there are so many better mics, even in the same or only slightly higher price range.

I think though, the NT2000 is about $600, and the NT2a is about $400 so you have to ask whether the extra $200 is really worth it. Frankly I have always found the NT1 to be great mic for the money and difficult to beat at about $200 (with shockmount!!!!).

If you have $1000 though, and you want really incredible vocals go for the Neumann TLM103. Even though it is their entry level mic, it sounds really clear and smooth, and will be a noticeable improvement over the Rode's.

It depends on what you're recording really, for male vocals then I would say you could probably get away with a shure beta 58, which is a dynamic mic. This will also be good for live work as well.
For female vocals or higher male vocals a condenser might give you better result because it'll probably have more low mids.
You should question whether you really need a condenser unless you really have a good room and want to pick up the natural ambience of it as well, otherwise a dunamic mic is better because its more directional.
I've got a marshall mxl 990 for what its worth, its a good mic and its honest, its also durable and good value for a condenser.
At the end of the day it all gets compressed and EQ'd anyway, so the important thing is to get something durable and honest, not neccesarily tricked out with valves, three different patterns and a toaster.

Can�t stand the Sure 57 and 58 in production also..there is some approaches for some special guitar sounds that you need the 57 for but I would always prefer MD 421 when it comes to dynamic mics.

I personally percieve the Rodes as sounding pretty Neumann-style, which is a sound I like very much. I used the NT-2 in a lot of Rock Recordings, not only vor Vocals but also as an Overhead and Guitar Mic.

The C414 is a mic I don�t like so much I think its quite harsh sounding. But I still use it occassionally, for example as a mic for rap vocals

But in the end I believe there are no mics that give more bang for the buck than the Rodes, they really have a great value for the money.

quote:

Originally posted by No Left Turn So what goes in is what you get.

Valid point. With Rode that may be true, but there are always those lovely rip-off companies.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.