Any mic has a chance to sound great on some particlaur source on any given day.
 
A lot of $300 pacific rim mics will not sound good on some voices.
 
There's a *famous maker* mic that costs $3599.95 that sounds horrible on a lot of voices too. ;-)
 
If you only have a few mics you can certainly make the one you use sound their best in post.
 
If you have a handful of mics you will learn that they certainly sound different and that some can or can not be persuaded in post editing to get to the same place when you are done.
 
best regards,
mike

AKG 414 and Audio Technical 4050.
WSS

Thanks guys I appreciate your sharing your own experiences.
 
Mike as I understand it the reason a lot of mic makers got away from tubes and transformers is because they add noise to the signal that isn't there with an FET mic or something along those lines. The noise they add some like, especially in the case of tubes. I don't think I have ever read where a user was ecstatic about how the transformers in his mic sounded though. I can see the argument for tubes on some level but for me it just doesn't seem to be worth the extra effort and expense to actually add noise to my signal. I'm not disagreeing with you but I don't necessarily the the return on investment nor the gain in fidelity.
 
In guitar amps. yes. In mics...no so much from my perspective. Maybe I'm missing something- We advance technology forward and then we seem to regress in the name of retro. If what you are actually looking for is a mic with some light compression at the expense of signal quality then I would be there. The whole issue of using tubes in mics is probably another involved discussion. I would be curious to hear a blind test between an FET mic and a Tube mic on the same vocalist to see how different it is...another consideration is tubes wear out, burn up and short out. Not necessarily a good long range plan for a mic you plan to have around and use for years to come.
 
Rebel I remember when the Rode NT1 was just coming out and all of the raves it got. They definitely have a foothold in the industry. I have seriously considered them as well.
 
Sven I totally agree. There seems to be a small difference in mics. Much smaller than most who make them would have you to believe. I think that manufacturers have liberally thrown marketing hype out there. I do think there is a difference on certain material and in certain applications which vary with the user and sometimes that seems to be determined by the user individually. You mentioned guitar pick ups.There is certainly a difference in clarity between certain kinds of guitar pickups. Some are muddier than others and not as defined.
 
Some of the things that could be taken as hype IMO are: Large diaphragm, gold sputtered diaphragm, artificially aged(yes that was an actual statement in the lit.) Even the use of Mogami cable. How much is using Mogami cable really going to help if it's on a sub 100 dollar mic? 
 
Mike, you and sven have by most accounts a really nice mic in the MXL V60 series. They made several different types of them in that category and some folks swear by them,yet Sweetwater won't dare carry them in their catalog. Why? I'm guessing it's because they want to be associated with high name recognition and MXL ain't it.Actually I'm being hypocritical if I say I don't feel similar. I don't want a  paying client to see "MXL" as my main recording mic.No more than I want to see my auto mechanic using Harbor Freight tools to service my car. Not that they are bad mics. I have been using an MXL 990 and it is passable. With a mod it could be Neuman like and I mean VERY Neuman like.. I don't think the addition of Mogami cable makes or breaks the V67 mic though.
 
Gold sputtered? Now much gold are they using. It can't be much. Have you checked the price of gold lately? If you sell me a gold sputtered mic made in China and I payed 39.95 for it then  it probably isn't worth mentioning.Maybe they mean gold paint sputtered??? I really don't think I'm going to hell if i buy non-sputtered. Is this some kind of a comparison? Can you tell me the difference in a blind test between sputtered and non sputtered?Artificiallty aged??? I'm probably artificially aged but that's another subject. How the heck do you "artificially age" something? It probably helps I'm just not sure how and I'm betting they don't want you to know too much about that.
 
Large diaphragm?? Please tell me how the SM 57 won a few blind mic tests when stacked against the likes of the U87 on vocals. Don't believe me? It's true.
 
http://transom.org/?p=7517
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ilwoAbd3n8&feature=youtu.be
 
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-shoot-outs-sound-file-comparisons-audio-tests/766252-wow-awesome-mic-shootout-video-comparing-12-popular-vocal-mics.html
 
Would you say the differences between these mics are drastic ?
 
 
So what does that really say about diaphragm size? I actually tracked my last busy mix with my ND767a dynamic and guess what? It surprised me. I can see the logic and reasoning behind large diaphram condensers....a larger surface area more capture. Probably true that they are better for smaller vocs.I had a similar experience when using my SM57 on a mix years ago. It sounded amazingly good for what it was. That mic is laying in the bottom of an old tote I carry to gigs sometimes. I never babied that mic and it still sounds good.If Mt. St Helens explodes and melts everything I'd be willing to bet you that my SM57 will still probably be there in that bag and doing ok.
 
So if we can't necessarily trust the criteria that the mic makers are sending our way the only thing left are personal accounts, actual use and personal testing of said mic.  I trust users experiences more than the claims of a company when it comes to mics.For me it boils down to longevity,dependability and performance, not necessarily in that order. Features like multiple polar patterns and pad switches are also helpful. Good clean powerful gain circuitry and  the ability to accurately reproduce without much EQ are definitely goals.
 
 

i really dig my Shure KSM44.
 
 

tom1
sven450
Based on my very limited experience, it seems more and more like really sweating one mic or another, or one set of pickups over another, or any of the things we obsess over is just a futile exercise. It can be kind of fun to shop, and compare, but when it comes down to it, how much can you really hear in the end? Keep in mind I'm
talking about rock or pop mixes. If you are recording quiet jazz, or intimate folk or something I suppose it matters a bit more, but with the way most vox are eventually EQed, compressed, and placed in the mix, how many people (experienced or not) can really tell the difference between this $300 fet mic or this $1000 tube mic? Can you tell I'm playing my 68 jazzmaster on this rock song? Or is it my Squire tele? Is that a $5000 Bock mic? A $200 AT? An SM58?
 
 
　
Sven, for someone with very limited experience your observations are astute.
 
You can also compare your choice of microphones with different mic pres to further muddy the water.
 
Having said that:
If you have a modest budget and you need a condenser, you can't go wrong with the Audio Technica 4033; Guitar Center sells them for around $350 or so.

I've got some great results from my 4033 over the years

Hi Starise,
You should write a book about mics.

You can do a whole chapter about how non sputtered capacitor mics have a very low noise floor. ;-)

I read a lot of mic reviews and both the AT4033 and the KSM44 get reviewed very well most of the time.  I had a subscription to Recording Magazine for quite a few years and they would do shoot outs on vocal mic's about once a year.  I recall the AT2020 doing quite well with most of the judges on the blind reviews as well.  They always would comment about it being a bare bones, no frills mic, but very pleasant sounding on many of the voices they tested.  
 
Bat, I for the life of me can't remember which famous producer it was in one article I read on the KSM44 singing praises of that mic and how it was becoming his goto mic for almost all situations.

Bit I hear you on the KSM44. That mic seems a little expensive for me at around a grand for a new one. I'll bet it is certainly nice. I am seeing Rode NT1s on ebay for under a hundred dollars. I guess the NT2 had polar patterns which makes it a more expensive mic. For that kind of money I might own one. 
 
I picked up an ST51 Sterling   for a little over 30 clams yesterday. I didn't go looking for one of those but for that price I figured it might make a nice addition to my cabinet. The curve on it looks pretty typical with some boost over the 5K region but it's pretty flat and uncolored otherwise. It's a large diaphragm mic with good freq response and yeah it's probably Chinese but for that price I wasn't going to say no. They typically go for triple that and I think GC or MF is having a sale right now on a set with both a condenser and a smaller capsule for 79.00. Some people swear by these mics. Apparently there is a difference between the 51 and the 55 with the 51 being departure in design from the rest.I didn't know it had a transformer when I bought it. I'll be interested to see what it sounds like or if it works lol.
 
I am still looking to add a few more mics. I was really looking at the Audio Technica mics. AT tried to improve on the 4033 with the 4040 but the whole sound of that mic is different. The 4033 has some weird bumps which are very slight right in the vocal range. From looking at the charts it seems to be only a few db or less. This would make that mic a little accentuated with some voices and this is probably why so many people like it for vocals. The 4040 OTOH is pretty flat until after 5 or 6 khz where it then does some weird stuff. It seems to have a dip at the higher freqs intead of a smooth taper. The 4050 uses two diaphragms and has multiple polar patterns. That mic is probably more than I really need. I looked at a few of the 4040's on ebay and the ones that come without a shock mount are less...but the darned shock mount costs 80.00. I really don't want to be wrangling duct tape to mount my mics and I'm not spending that on a mount. Then most of these have some kind of baggage, a nick here , this is missing, I haven't tried this out so I don't know if it works etc etc etc....I might as well buy a new one with a warranty. They won't tell you if it fell numerous times or if it exeeded the  DB SPL it was rated for. For all I know it was in a bass kick for two years. I know you can get lucky but it is a chance you take.
 
I seen this, need an interface and  mic? http://www.ebay.com/itm/171240926694?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
 
It looks like a decent deal for a beginner. I think if I were to buy a Blue Mic it would be something more like the bluebird, but the spark has a nice sound.
 
One thing I noticed about the tests in the video concerning the SM57 is that the singer stands the same distance away from it which looks to be around 12-14". I didn't expect the SM57 to sound as good but I know they would have picked up more bass and presence from it if he had been standing closer to it. You can get really close to an SM57 and that inhanced the bass effect of that mic at the risk of some plosives. 
 
As of now my main pick for best choice in a home studio mic would be the AT line and the 4000 series, whether it is the 4033 or the 4040-4050 is probably a matter of preference with the 4040 being more neutral and the 4033 being more flattering to some vocal ranges,not so good for others. Neither of these two mics are anything alike in their internals. The designs are totally different. The 4033 was changed from PCB mount to surface mount as of the 4033CL. This is said to be an improvement.Japanese made, good price points,good track record.
 
It doesn't hurt to have a few different types of mics. I would be curious of your experiences with others like Avantone,Octava,CAD,Blue,AKG perception.
 
Here's yet another mic shootout. If I had listened with a blind fold I likely would not have picked the u87 as the top mic. Listen to the AT 4050 at 4:30 I'm guessing it is on  cardoid pattern and only using one element which makes it similar to the 4033/4040. At around 7:30 check out the SM57. I think it holds up amazingly well for a 99 dollar microphone.
 
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS18hqLV_NQ
 
 

How about an M-Audio Nova?
 
4-1/2 stars at Sweetwater.

makeshift-
i have a AT4033 as well, and really like it too!
 
 
i chose my microphones very carefully, all of them do something the others dont...
i like my ADK Hamburg for background vocals and acoustic guitars, as the 2nd mic near the body....

the ksm44's, LOTS of pros use them....
i know joe barresi really likes em....
you probably read an interview in TAPEOP
and of course eddie kramer, worked with shure on the ksm44, so he digs them as well....
 
 

starise-
people ALWAYS want a better mic, but end up scrimping on the ONE GOOD MIC they have, and always are looking for something else.
moral of story-
save your money, get what you want/need.
my KSM really is superior to either my at4033, adk hamburg, or the venerable shure SM57!
LOL
which, as a matter of fact, i occassionally still use for lead vocals...
they are all tools, and all sound different.

the multipattern ability of the KSM44 alone, makes it superior to most..
not to mention the awesome sound.