No U87, got a K2

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:47:07 -0400, bayydogg wrote
(in article <2bd18a8f.0408232347.4aae7671@posting.google.com> ):

> I recently posted here asking for Neumann U87 alternatives. I rented a
> U87, and it sounded stellar with my Grace 101. I can't afford a U87,
> but got a bargain on a Rode K2. It sounds great! Any comments about
> the K2?

AS I have posted before, the K2 is a significant step forward for Rode. They
smoothed out the peak they normally have had. Very nice.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:38:27 -0400, Mikey wrote
(in article <526517d0.0408242338.21148be3@posting.google.com> ):

> Ty Ford <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:<CvWdnQlnna3qa7bcRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:47:07 -0400, bayydogg wrote
>> (in article <2bd18a8f.0408232347.4aae7671@posting.google.com> ):
>>
>>> I recently posted here asking for Neumann U87 alternatives. I rented a
>>> U87, and it sounded stellar with my Grace 101. I can't afford a U87,
>>> but got a bargain on a Rode K2. It sounds great! Any comments about
>>> the K2?
>>
>> AS I have posted before, the K2 is a significant step forward for Rode.
>> They
>> smoothed out the peak they normally have had. Very nice.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ty Ford
>
> Ty, I'm considering a K2 in the future. When you say the peak has been
> smoothed out (The peak I can clearly hear in my NT1s), do you mean the
> peak has broadened and become more pleasant/euphonic, or do you mean
> it has shrunk/gone away? Or perhaps moved to a different freq. range?
> What other mic would you compare the K2 to soundwise?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mikey Wozniak
> Nova Music Productions
> This sig is haiku

Hi Mike,

You get to spank me. I was thinking about the NT2000. Its frequency center is
still up around 11kHz. In omni the book shows it at +5 with a +4 in cardioid,
but it sounded a bit smoother on top.

I think there might have been some other considerations than pure the peak
that make a difference. Give it a listen and concentrate on the peak area.
Obviously, different preamps will also color the sound.

Sorry for any confusion.

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

It's getting kinky here..."whip me, beat me, make some feedback..." just kidding.
Thanks for sharing this info Ty.

Audy O


> Hi Mike,
>
> You get to spank me. I was thinking about the NT2000. Its frequency center is
> still up around 11kHz. In omni the book shows it at +5 with a +4 in cardioid,
> but it sounded a bit smoother on top.
>
> I think there might have been some other considerations than pure the peak
> that make a difference. Give it a listen and concentrate on the peak area.
> Obviously, different preamps will also color the sound.
>
> Sorry for any confusion.
>
> Ty
>
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:31:22 -0400, Mikey wrote
(in article <526517d0.0408251031.754baea6@posting.google.com> ):

> Ty Ford <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:<4oadndCfjaXGDLHcRVn-vw@comcast.com>...
>
>
>>> Ty, I'm considering a K2 in the future. When you say the peak has been
>>> smoothed out (The peak I can clearly hear in my NT1s), do you mean the
>>> peak has broadened and become more pleasant/euphonic, or do you mean
>>> it has shrunk/gone away? Or perhaps moved to a different freq. range?
>>> What other mic would you compare the K2 to soundwise?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Mikey Wozniak
>>> Nova Music Productions
>>> This sig is haiku
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> You get to spank me.
>
> Only if I don't have to pay.
>
>> I was thinking about the NT2000. Its frequency center is
>> still up around 11kHz. In omni the book shows it at +5 with a +4 in
>> cardioid,
>> but it sounded a bit smoother on top.
>>
>> I think there might have been some other considerations than pure the peak
>> that make a difference. Give it a listen and concentrate on the peak area.
>> Obviously, different preamps will also color the sound.
>>
>> Sorry for any confusion.
>>
>
> Ty,
> IIRC, the K2 is a tube version of the NT2000, so the sound should be
> quite similar. The NT1s do sound peaky around 10-11k to me, so maybe
> capsule/electronics improvements have mellowed the peak a bit. If it's
> broader, that could sound quite good. Anyone else using a K2? What are
> the closest-sounding other mics (tube or otherwise)?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Mikey Wozniak

Mike,

They are, but they don't sound the same. The NT2000 is not as peaky. I did
have both here at the same time.

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com