Behringer B1, cheap but good? Options

[visualmusic]

Just checking out affordable condenser mics for recording vocals and acoustic guitar. I've heard the Behringer B1 is a good deal, and the Rode NT-1, which is twice as expensive. Anyone used either or both?

BTW, I'm recording through a M-box plugged into a PB Ti G4 1Ghz.

Thanks for the help!

[ennoda77]

get the b1...rode is a waste of money for an mbox preamp....

[Ben Up the Tree]

I was also considering the B1, but got sidetracked by the B2 Pro and it's claim "Vocalists and recording studio owners will be amazed by its uncompromising audio performance and features such as the additional low cut filter"

Oooooohhh! I said to myself... not understanding what the hell their talking about. I hope to be recording vocals/guitar with the thing, but do you think it's worth it?

Although I'm recording on a Tascam US-122.

Ce message a été modifié par Ben Up the Tree - jeu. 22 janv. 2004, 00:19.

[swilder]

Keep in mind that sound is only one consideration. How about build quality or customer support. Behringer scores low in all of these areas. The only edge they have is price. But cheap crap is still crap.

NT-1 is a great mic that you won't outgrow.

the B2 is only $50 cheaper. Spring for the extra few bucks and get a much better mic.

Another consideration should be the Studio Projects c1. $199 and it sounds absolutely wonderful as well.

I would recommend just about anything over Behringer equipment. Every piece of their stuff I've used is crap except their Powerplay Pro headphone amp.

Scott

[visualmusic]

I thought the M-Box had enough preamp power? Do you need more for the NT-1?

Any suggestions on condenser mics for recording acoustic guitar? Something smaller than the B-1 or NT-1. Thanks for the feedback.

[Ben Up the Tree]

I don't think it has anything to do with the preamp's power, more the M-Box's 48 kHz ceiling sampling rate which is half as much as the industry standard of 96 kHz. It's just a question of how pro you want to get. While you could use $2,000 Blue condenser mic on a M-Box, much of it's sensitivity would be wasted on the $450 USB digital interface... my thought is, it can't hurt to get the bet mic I can afford, because one day I might upgrade my USB interface to a 16 track Firewire 800 super jammy board with 96khz and I can still use my high quality mic.

NT-1 it is!

...unless somebody out there can recommend anything else?

Ce message a été modifié par Ben Up the Tree - jeu. 22 janv. 2004, 22:53.

[lepetitmartien]

I've got a C1, great stuff. (well, Studio Project should offer me a pre with all the advertising I'm making for them

I like the NT1, but some don't like it.

I've still not tried the Behringer, but I'd be cautious. Think about the precision/quality there must be in a condenser mic (as in any mic) and you'll start to think about the reason the price goes ever lower. I can be good, it can be crap.

Get at least the NT1 or NT1-a (lower noise, multi pattern = more versatile)

You'll can later grow to a better pre/converter.

Now, a 96 kHz is not better than a 48 or a 44,1. Converters are dependable of:
- analogue stage just before (in the converter)
- chip used (a lot of converters use the same ones)
- bit depth (it's better a 24 than a 20 or a 16, lower noise by simple maths but a good 20 can outgrow a bad 24 anytime)
- frequency (you need 48 for video work, else 44 or 96 are ok, remember dithering from 96 to 44 or 48 to 44 will be more destructive than anything else if done badly. It can not be done in low end softwarethe right way, it shows! Now 96 takes a lot of space on drives, use 44 instead but work at 24 if you can.
- clock (good clocking gives regularity in the frequency = better transients)

Now make a few experiments with the same material and verify the way you do things is the better sounding. If your converter sounds better at 20/44 than at 24/96 (just a figure) which one do you choose? Trust your ears!

Also you need a good audio chain and material to hear the benefits of 96kHz (it'll show on vocals and classic instruments, if you compose DnB or rock pop, it won't be that important)

Now most decent converter should be able to work correctly if not at their best at 24/44 or 24/48 just try to be coherent (don't change the bit depth all the time, try different settings to see the best etc.). try not to have to dither too much and with the right plug in (ie in OS9 better to dither in PT than Cubase)

Also, think that a pre on a 450$ converter box will never match a pre costing 450$ itself

Chose a mic you can still use in 5 years time, you will change of converters and have a decent pre before that.

[Ben Up the Tree]

Thank you so much lepetitmartien, that was extremely insightful. I will play this weekend with my settings and take a good listen.

[visualmusic]

I agree with Been Up the Tree. That was very helpful! Thanks lepetitmartien. I get my M-Box on Monday so I'll have to wait to do the experiment. I was also wondering about getting around latancy with an USB DAW. Is it best to run a preamp with the headphones? Or do you have to adjust something during the recording? Sorry, I'm so new at this...I'm asking questions before I even have the thing!

[lepetitmartien]

No arm done

Now visualmusic, this would be a _different_ thread It's all getting far from the B1 isn't it?

[visualmusic]

Ahh yes, lepetitmartien...thanks for keeping me in line.

I broke down and bought the B-1. Mainly because of costs. I'm just doing the acoustic guitar/vocal thing for demos at the present. However, Behringer suggests you use gold plated XLR connections with the mic. Does this really make a difference in the sound quality? If so what cost effective 25 ft. cable should I go with?

Thanks for the feedback.

[lepetitmartien]

Gold plating is interesting because Gold don't oxydize… Oxyds are BAD (noise, radio effect, scraaaaatch). Though, Gold platting tend to wear off easily… sometimes VERY easily.

I think you're better off putting money in a good cable, with good shielding and Neutrik connectors (you'll plug/un-plug them a lot like other cables you may have).

I'm sure some US user can point you to some correct sources.

[dmrkh]

If contemplating Monster Cable, then know that they are owned by Radio Shack.
So don't think I'm saying that Monster's won't be Caddy's to RS's Buick's. But an Electra 225 can be a sweet ride.

And the price pt.

[visualmusic]

Thanks for the help on the cable suggestions.

I've been playing with the MBox and the B-1 for the last couple of days. I have the phantom power on, but I'm not getting a good signal when recording? I thought 48v was enough to preamp the B-1. Am I doing something wrong? If I crank the gain way up I get a ton of noise (of course). It just seems I would get better volume. Any suggestions?

BTW I'm running PowerBook G4, OS X 2.8, 1Ghz, 1Ghz RAM

[lepetitmartien]

As far as I know Monster cables are ok but overpriced.

[visualmusic]

What about Mogami? Are they over priced as well?

[lepetitmartien]

I can't tell…

[Ben Up the Tree]

I got the Monster Cable Standard 100 which although not gold plated seems to deliver very good quality signal. 20 foot was $30, I don't know if it was a good deal, but it seems like a quality product. I'm using it with a Studio Projects C1, thank you very much lepetitmartien, and am enjoying listening to my room to try to hear what it sounds like recorded.

[lepetitmartien]

Glad you like the C1

$30, that's about the price of 150 m (500 feet) of good cable in roll… go figure
In the USA you can buy neutrik connectors for less than a $1. I've never said Monster were not quality, but expensive

Better expensive and good than cheap and crap

[nacho45]

Marshall's cheap condensors are solid. I use the 93v.

[KaiKProd]

i bought the B1 not long ago. i think its an excellent mic for the price. ok so it doesn't sound like vocals do on CDs but that could be many other factors contributing to that. it gives me crystal clear vocals. im really pleased. it even records other instruments with remarkable clarity. im really impressed. well worth the money.