Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AT-822 or Nady CM-2S ?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 1:03:43 AM

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

I've used a (borrowed) Audio Technica AT-822 stereo mic for recording
acoustic jazz trio and quartet. I really like it. I was about to buy
one when I heard about the Nady CM-2S. It appears to be identical to
the AT-822 for much less.
Here's a link to the technical docs for both mics.

http://www.jazzdrummer.com/mics/at822.pdf

http://www.jazzdrummer.com/mics/CM2S.pdf

Though I gather that Nady and Audio Technica are not in the same
league, I would expect the Nady to sound very much like the Audio
Technica based on the identical specs, but I would love to know what
anyone else here thinks.

Thanks,


Keith Runfola
www.jazzdrummer.com

More about : 822 nady

Anonymous
August 30, 2005 1:12:17 AM

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

keith runfola <remove this> wrote:
>I've used a (borrowed) Audio Technica AT-822 stereo mic for recording
>acoustic jazz trio and quartet. I really like it. I was about to buy
>one when I heard about the Nady CM-2S. It appears to be identical to
>the AT-822 for much less.

It's not.

>Though I gather that Nady and Audio Technica are not in the same
>league, I would expect the Nady to sound very much like the Audio
>Technica based on the identical specs, but I would love to know what
>anyone else here thinks.

It doesn't. I'm not a great fan of the AT-822 to begin with. But if
you have listened to it and like it, buy it, stop worrying, and don't
look back.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 1:39:05 AM

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

On 29 Aug 2005 21:12:17 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>keith runfola <remove this> wrote:
>>I've used a (borrowed) Audio Technica AT-822 stereo mic for recording
>>acoustic jazz trio and quartet. I really like it. I was about to buy
>>one when I heard about the Nady CM-2S. It appears to be identical to
>>the AT-822 for much less.
>
>It's not.
>
>>Though I gather that Nady and Audio Technica are not in the same
>>league, I would expect the Nady to sound very much like the Audio
>>Technica based on the identical specs, but I would love to know what
>>anyone else here thinks.
>
>It doesn't. I'm not a great fan of the AT-822 to begin with. But if
>you have listened to it and like it, buy it, stop worrying, and don't
>look back.
>--scott

Thanks Scott. I would love to hear what stereo mic you prefer and
exactly why you think the Nady CM-2S isn't as good as the AT-822.
I'm trying to learn something here. Thanks again,


Keith Runfola
www.jazzdrummer.com
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 2:46:01 AM

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

keith runfola <remove this> wrote:
>
>Thanks Scott. I would love to hear what stereo mic you prefer and
>exactly why you think the Nady CM-2S isn't as good as the AT-822.
>I'm trying to learn something here. Thanks again,

I can't talk about what is inside the Nady for various reasons.

But for a very interesting test, try using any one of these stereo
mikes just as a mono mike, with one channel. Listen to a pair of
keys jingling through them. This will tell you a lot about the
ability of the mike to handle transients. Then listen to a voice,
and listen as the voice moves off to the side, keeping the same
distance. This tells you something about the off-axis response.

You'll find the difference between good and bad microphones centers
around these two factors. The Nady does something very interesting
on the key jingle test.

In that price range you don't have too many better choices than the
AT.... the Shure VP-88 sounds good but is kind of noisy. I'm not a
big fan of stereo mikes because they aren't very flexible, but if
you absolutely need a stereo mike rather than a pair of seperate
cardioids, it might be worth putting the money into the Sankens.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
!