Hi All,

I am fairly new to recording at home (and this forum) but I am getting to the point were I need to get a reasonable quality vocal mic which is not too expensive.  I know 'expensive' is relative but I was looking to spend around £100 - £150.


Over the last few months I have looked at so many mic's and read so many reviews that I have a headache and my head is spinning, and I still can't make a decision.

I am currently looking at the Rode NT1-A Vocal pack which is available at Amazon:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rode-NT1-A-Vocal-Condenser-Microphone/dp/B0002PSCQM/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pdT1_S_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=107LZXZ64CCW3&coliid=IYTWBHPU4WXA7

Does anyone have experience of this mic?

The kit is at a good price and the reviews I have read are all pretty positive, including the one by Paul White in SOS in May 2004.  Rode seem to have a good reputation and the original price (£179) did not include the pop screen or cable which is now included.

My main 'issue' really is that this model is now over 8 years old, but that doesn't matter at all if it is a good 'entry level' mic that will serve the purpose.

I think this may be the one to go for but, before I take the plunge, I would value any observations, comments or advice you may have.

Thanks in advance

Gary

I used to have a pair of NT-1s. They're good mics and Rode's customer support is top notch. Whether there's something you'd like better for the same money I couldn't say, but I liked the ones I had.

Thanks for that.  The NT1's were also well reported by SOS and they felt the 1-a's were even better.

They are bright and thinnish mics. But that didn't stop us using them on nearly every track on an album a few years ago. I'd still recommend the MXL2003a for a smoother sound.

They are bright and thinnish mics.

Prone to sibilance and easy to overdrive with plosives. No pad, no HPF and cardiod-only. But even though it's not going to be a do-everything general-purpose mic, on the right sources or voices (e.g. baritone male voice, guitar cabinets) it sounds quite good. 


I've never tried the MXL that Sven's always talking up, but I've heard similar good reviews elsewhere as well. Might be worth a go.

Thanks guys,

The MXL2003a is nearly £200 here in the UK without a shock mount, pop screen or cable (not that I need the cable) and even it doesn't get perfect reviews, but then I guess no mic ever does as it's a very subjective matter.
Looks like the 1A may be a reasonable 'starter' for me.  I guess I will only find out which mic is suitable for the sounds I want after I have tried them.  Unfortunately, like some on here, I live a long way from my nearest music store which doesn't have any form of studio or other set-up where I can test a few!  I may just have to jump in and see how it goes.....

 On a like note...

I worked for a production company that did sound reinforcement for concerts. The hands down standard for vocal mics was the Shure SM58 and primarily the SM57 for mic'ed instruments.

I have never heard a reason that these same mics are not preferable for studio use. I've never had any problem using SM57's so what's the difference?

I would tend to agree with DrLumen on this: if your budget is limited, you really can't go wrong with a 58 or 57. I'd prefer the latter if I could only have one or the other, as it's better-suited for close-miking drums and speaker cabinets. The two are sonically identical, the only difference being the ball-type windscreen on the 58. A 57 works fine for vocals, and you can always put a pop filter in front of it for sibilant singers, although sibilance isn't usually an issue with a 57/58. 

Gary, try an SM57. I don't know how UK prices compare, but here in the US they're only a hundred bucks and will almost certainly be less than the Rode. Or any decent LDC, for that matter.

DrLumen


 On a like note...

I worked for a production company that did sound reinforcement for concerts. The hands down standard for vocal mics was the Shure SM58 and primarily the SM57 for mic'ed instruments.

I have never heard a reason that these same mics are not preferable for studio use. I've never had any problem using SM57's so what's the difference?

That sure makes sense and as I already have a 58 for live use anyway....   
I guess I have been told that for studio vocals you need a condenser microphone 

bitflipper 

I would tend to agree with DrLumen on this: if your budget is limited, you really can't go wrong with a 58 or 57. I'd prefer the latter if I could only have one or the other, as it's better-suited for close-miking drums and speaker cabinets. The two are sonically identical, the only difference being the ball-type windscreen on the 58. A 57 works fine for vocals, and you can always put a pop filter in front of it for sibilant singers, although sibilance isn't usually an issue with a 57/58.   

Gary, try an SM57. I don't know how UK prices compare, but here in the US they're only a hundred bucks and will almost certainly be less than the Rode. Or any decent LDC, for that matter.  

Again, thanks for the common sense response.  As I have a 58, maybe I should stick with that for the time being.  I have no need to mic drums at the moment but I will need to mic a cabinet or two.  Maybe get a 57 as well and cover both bases?  57's are around £90 - £100, about the same as the 58! 

Thanks again guys 

Gary