soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
I have been looking for one more large diaphragm dynamic to compliment my RE20. Note that the RE20 I have is NOT a neodymium element. And I am glad..... Neodym is what I am trying to avoid.
I have researched the MD421 which I am still not sure whether it is neodym or not. Also the Heil PR series, but all are neodym....although I am still tempted to try one, probably the PR40. I have a used EV ND868 which has a large element (kick drum mic?) but it is, unfortunately neodym also (hence the "ND" in the model number). Even the SM7b is a neodym mic, which I found to be very depressing since I was absolutely dieing to try one.
So what are the other large diaphragm dynamic mics that are not neodym? Why so few of them? Why are they so hard to find? Why are all the makers turning to neodym? It's nice to have a hotter signal on stage, but imo neodym sucks for recording, even at home.
In the absence of largest diaphragm dynamics, what would be the next largest ones? I had a el cheapo AKG D770 once that I put on the back of an open back guitar cab, and I realized after I sold it that it actually was a great mic for that purpose. Wish I had it back. The RE20 is awesome on guitar cab. The ribbons are great on guitar cab. But what am I overlooking?
|
newfuturevintage
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1848
- Joined: 2004/11/04 20:35:09
- Location: o'land, ca
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/29 18:10:01
(permalink)
why the aversion to neodym? You've stated, "imo neodym sucks for recording", but why is that? I've never heard this complaint before, and am curious where you're coming from.
My inner child is an angry drunk.
|
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2349
- Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
- Location: Indiana
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 00:06:34
(permalink)
I thought the RE-20 was still built with original specs and components and that the Re-27 was the neodymium based mics. Been awhile since I 've looked into them though. You could try looking on E-bay to find older ones. I'd love to have a pair of them myself. Many years ago my older brother set a nearly new pair of them on the hood of his car and drove off forgetting about them... never found them again. Still hurts thinking about that one. 
|
soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 00:28:01
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Rbh
I thought the RE-20 was still built with original specs and components and that the Re-27 was the neodymium based mics. Not sure why you said this.....my RE20 is NOT neodym.....
|
soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 00:34:24
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: newfuturevintage
why the aversion to neodym? You've stated, "imo neodym sucks for recording", but why is that? I've never heard this complaint before, and am curious where you're coming from.
I used to think it was pretty cool......(The ND468 and ND967 sounded particularly good on the guitar cab)......until I acquired the ability to record a single source using several mics side by side and play them back side by side and compare. In ALL cases, for the kind of music and sound that I do, the non-neodym mics always sound better, smoother, more natural, more realistic. The n-dyms always sound like they have an exaggerated presence boost, too edgy, too hot, too bright, too cutting. Those qualitites work well on a live stage, but for recording I noticed I always ended up eq'ing and trying to compensate for the edgy sound. In every compare I did, the RE20 sounded better than ANY neodymium mic, regardless of what brand the neodym was. For example, I almost bought an AKG D112, until I found out it is ndym. Same way with the Heil PR mics. I have since learned that the non-ndym predecessor would be the AKG D12, but a real D12 in good condition sells for almost 3 times as much $$$$$$ as a new D112. Would love to try a vintage D12, but cant afford that much money for it....
post edited by soundchaser59 - 2008/04/30 00:54:38
|
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2349
- Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
- Location: Indiana
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 01:02:44
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: soundchaser59
ORIGINAL: Rbh
I thought the RE-20 was still built with original specs and components and that the Re-27 was the neodymium based mics.
Not sure why you said this.....my RE20 is NOT neodym.....
I mean that the original RE-20's are not neodymium. The new RE-20's are not Neodymium either. E.V introduced the RE-27 as the Neodymium version of the RE-20. You might be confusing their Variable D technology for neodymium which it isn't. It stands for Variable Dynamics which is a way they decreased the proximity effects.
|
soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 09:59:13
(permalink)
Thanks people for the info and pointers....
I learn something every day. I dont know where I read that the SM7b is a "beta" style neodymium mic. Probably some hyped up ad copyon ebay or some magazine article, I cant remember, and I cant find anything like that now.
But apparently I am mistaken about that, and I'm glad to find out the SM7 (or SM7b) is not neodym. That option is back on the table now!
|
newfuturevintage
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1848
- Joined: 2004/11/04 20:35:09
- Location: o'land, ca
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 14:52:52
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: soundchaser59
I used to think it was pretty cool......(The ND468 and ND967 sounded particularly good on the guitar cab)......until I acquired the ability to record a single source using several mics side by side and play them back side by side and compare.
In ALL cases, for the kind of music and sound that I do, the non-neodym mics always sound better, smoother, more natural, more realistic.
The n-dyms always sound like they have an exaggerated presence boost, too edgy, too hot, too bright, too cutting. Those qualitites work well on a live stage, but for recording I noticed I always ended up eq'ing and trying to compensate for the edgy sound. In every compare I did, the RE20 sounded better than ANY neodymium mic, regardless of what brand the neodym was.
For example, I almost bought an AKG D112, until I found out it is ndym. Same way with the Heil PR mics. I have since learned that the non-ndym predecessor would be the AKG D12, but a real D12 in good condition sells for almost 3 times as much $$$$$$ as a new D112. Would love to try a vintage D12, but cant afford that much money for it....
Thanks for your explanation...I can see where you're coming from better now. I would suggest, though, that the ndym aspect of the mics you're comparing to the RE20 is a much smaller component to the sonic differences you're hearing than the differences in capsule design & placement / venting / blast filtration / internal compensation circuits & output transformer (if so fitted, the RE20 has one) between the mics. The ND468 and ND967 are about as different to the RE20 in design as is Jesus to SpiderMan. Taking a quick look at the 468's response chart, I'd think up close it would be seriously scooped in tone, way over represented in the low end, too much top. Same mic, I'd think would be really well suited for toms. Also, think about how different sm57 is to the sm58. My understanding is they are electronically identical, differing only in capsule location and venting. Given what you're saying about edginess, stay away from the d112. You will hate it. Only mic I've ever sold just to get rid of. Serious presence peak ~ 5khz (designed to capture the beater slap on a kick). I wouldn't recommend the d12 either, but for the other direction: very bassy (though I love it: great for kick and brass). Just some thoughts anyhow...
My inner child is an angry drunk.
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 15:16:27
(permalink)
soundchaser, you've piqued my curiosity. Can you point me to any online reference that explains why the material used to make the magnet would affect sound quality?
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 17:35:51
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: bitflipper
soundchaser, you've piqued my curiosity. Can you point me to any online reference that explains why the material used to make the magnet would affect sound quality?
Not sure, I will look. I know I've read sales pitch hype before that said something about the n-dym elements being more responsive, or the n-dym magnets being able to generate more power when they move........similar to the reason neodym magnet speakers sound so much louder and edgier than regular ceramics or alnicos. Now that you ask, I cannot honestly say if the magnet composition is the sole reason it sounds different. I just know I have done side by side recordings/playback substituting (for example) a regular SM57 with an SM57Beta (neodym) and without changing anything else in the signal chain except the mic, they sound different. The Beta is not just louder, it sounds brighter, edgier, and - imo - harsher, thinner, less natural somehow. Back in the day when I knew infinitely less about music engineering than I know now, I thought louder and edgier was better. Today I know better. Maybe they are just building neodym mics differently? Someone else asked me why I would care what it's made of, and I figured if I didnt' care about the sound, then I wouldn't care what it's made of. Maybe I should have said, more precisely, that it has to do with HOW it's made? It makes sense that the specs and parameters of the actual construction, shape, size, chambers, etc. would all effect the sound characteristics in some way. By that notion, then, it might be possible to take one mic, replace the alnico element with an n-dym element (replace only the magnet, that is) and it would sound the same? Except perhaps a little bit louder? I wish I could explain the physics behind it, but I cant. But I am convinced that the side by side listens I did were honest, and I came away from that no longer appreciating the sound of the n-dym mics. Sometimes I regret selling that ND468, but then I plug in the RE20 and all my regrets disappear. By the way, someone on the Shure techie forum confirmed that the SM7 series mics use an alnico magnet.
|
soundchaser59
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 558
- Joined: 2008/02/18 21:02:52
- Status: offline
RE: Which LD Dynamics Are NOT Neodym?
2008/04/30 17:57:57
(permalink)
Here is a start, makes sense me thinks...... (from another forum I surf) Also, keep in mind that most manufacturers won't even tell you what magnet material they use- the Neodymium descriptor is pretty much an EV thing, although there are some other manufacturers that have picked up on it (largely to coattail on EV's marketing effort). I'd go so far as to say that neodymium is present in pretty much every current "rare earth" magnet structure, since they are cheaper than a samarium cobalt magnet of equal strength
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_magnet )
The big deal here is that these magnets produce a much higher magnetic flux than standard alnico or ferritic magnets (by a factor of 10 to 20!). Given this, you can have the same electrical output from a much smaller voice coil, which reduces the mass of the diaphragm and makes better HF response possible. The higher the flux, the smaller the magnet or a given output, which means the smaller the coil can be. This reduced diaphragm mass also allows for the higher sensitivity that the manufacturers often tout...
I have no doubt that rare-earth based mics sound different than alnico or ferrite mics for this reason. However, I'm not at all ready to say that they are "better"- they are just different. If you're really that worried about the neodymium structures, then you should probably skip out on anything labeled "rare earth" or "samarium cobalt" as well. But frankly, I wouldn't worry about the material at all, and just use your ears. I'd bet a beer that some of your favorite sounding dynamics use rare earth magnets of one or the other flavors, these days- they are just much more efficient than ferrite or alnico.
Last of all: there are duff mics with every label and every design. Some are good, and some can be truly horrid- like the brand-new (mailordered) Neumann TLM103 I had with a poorly tensioned diaphragm that sounded like it was packed in 4 inches of cotton batting. Pretty, expensive, but useless. And replaced under warranty, BTW- they stand behind their product. Botom line is that you always must use your ears, and look past the labels: and if it doesn't sound good to you, it doesn't sound good (regardless of why), and it's your music!
|