Dynamic vs Condenser vs Internal Microphones on musette tuned accordion

[96Bass]

I made a video comparing an AKG C414 BULS (condenser), Sennheiser MD441 (dynamic), and Harmonik AC 5001 HQ (internal condenser system).
Recorded with no EQ and no post processing. The beginning of the video is a blind comparison but the mics are revealed towards the end of the video.
All the audio was recorded simultaneously so there is no difference in the performance.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the different mics.

 

[pitzelberger]

Surprisingly, I like the sound of the internal mics the most. I was only listening on my cellphone though…

 

[debra]

I'm sure opinions will vary...
I first did just the blind test and my opinion was (and still is):
1. I like microphone A the best. It has a clear sound that is well-balanced.
2. Microphone B is similarly clear but sounds a bit too sharp to my ears.
3. Microphone C lacks what I would call "roominess". It sounds boxed in and the sound varies between notes.
After listening to this I was already certain that Microphone C was the Harmonik. It may start sounding better when some reverb is added to add the roominess the other two have. I couldn't be sure whether A or B was the dynamic versus condensor.
It may be a coincidence, but in the end the Mic I like best is a close relative to the mics I use to make my recordings. I use AKG C214 mics, a somewhat less expensive version similar to the C414 but with slightly less S/N ratio. These are large diaphragm condensor mics and have an outstanding reputation. Before these were generally available I used the Sennheiser MD421 mics, which are standard workhorses from several decades ago. I'm not very surprised the Harmonik doesn't do as good a job (to my ears). Especially with the tremolo it cannot hide the fact that it uses 5 capsules and the sound of a note positioned in between two capsules is just not the same as the sound of a note positioned directly under one capsule.

 

[jozz]

nice mics you got there
A and B are placed differently so it's that is where most of the difference comes from
the 441 is always killer though

regarding the internals:
you need to put some compression on your internals, from what I hear now I gather there is no reason to upgrade my Sennheiser MT-04 to Harmonik
how did you set your gain on the internals?

 

[debra]

nice mics you got there
A and B are placed differently so it's that is where most of the difference comes from
the 441 is always killer though

...

The Sennheiser records sound at the front end and the AKG records sound at the side. So in fact they are both aimed directly at the accordion.

 

[oldbayan]

All good sound, but A and C seem to sound better than B, which lacks a bit of "attack". My experience is that condenser mics seems to give a little more presence than dynamic mics. We must say that a bit of compressing and equalization can help improving the sound in all cases, but when the original signal is more rounded, chances are the post-processed signal will be better.

 

[jozz]

The Sennheiser records sound at the front end and the AKG records sound at the side. So in fact they are both aimed directly at the accordion.

I know
the difference in sound and volume of A and B comes either from placement or they were not gained the same

 

[kimric]

The thing that really surprised me is how much difference the amp makes. One of the best amps I have found over the years was a Yamaha JX30.
Handles the range of an accordion with a nice bottom end and does not have that metallic sound some amps can give an accordion.
I keep one in the shop for demos on my mic system and for testing.

 

[JerryPH]

I made a video comparing an AKG C414 BULS (condenser), Sennheiser MD441 (dynamic), and Harmonik AC 5001 HQ (internal condenser system).
Recorded with no EQ and no post processing. The beginning of the video is a blind comparison but the mics are revealed towards the end of the video.
All the audio was recorded simultaneously so there is no difference in the performance.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the different mics.

OOOhh, you are talking my world.... I'll have a listen after work today and see what I can hear.

 

[JerryPH]

Awwwww... slightly disappointed I was hoping that you would NOT say which is which, I even skipped reading the responses... lol

Six points:
1 - With careful MINOR equalization adjustments ANY of these mics could be made to sound pretty much like the other.
2 - Where were the tone controls set to on the Harmonics mics? Sounds like they were turned down on the controls a touch to lose a little top end? Mine have a nice clear sound with the tone controls centered.
3 - The one thing that you cannot do with a single (or dual) external mic is have the level of L/R separation and CONTROL over the stereo image like you do with internals (also less chance of feedback and ease of setup).
4 - Internals are far less affected by external sounds than external mounted mikes (even my cheap $150 pencil condensors pickup the sound of the TV upstairs, something that never is heard when recording on the internal mics.
5 - The AKG and Sennheiser mics sounded slightly tinny. My SE4400a's are supposed to sound a bit higher in that range, but they don't. That could be mostly due to the room acoustics.
6 - The AKG was aimed more at the bellows and the Sennheiser more towards the grill, there was also at least a 3-5db difference in the volume lower on the AKG mic. Maybe in gain settings, choice of sound pattern or some combination thereof, it sounded quieter.

Bottom line, all three can give you more than adequate and nice quality sounds.

Early in my days starting to play with condensor mics, I learned that I could get a pair of $20 condensors to sound good, and if I could not afford anything else, I'd still be able to squeeze a pretty fair final result from them.

 

[96Bass]

I didn't use any post processing such as compression or EQ as those adjustments are subjective and will vary by who is applying the processing. I wanted to demonstrate the sound of the mic itself as a starting point. I see from the members that responded, opinions on the mics also varied. Personally, I liked the recording through the Sennheiser MD441 best, Mic B.
The placement of the mics was deceptive due to the position and angle of the camera. The center of the mic capsules were 2 inches apart, as close as I was able to get them. The mics were aimed at the curve of the grill at the middle of the grill (circle in attached photo). The Harmonik model I have does not have the tone controls that Jerry referred to, just volume controls for bass and treble.
The internal Harmonik mics can sound very good with a touch of compression and EQ but I did detect some "hot spot" of the notes directly in front of the mic capsules. For performing live in a group, I am sold on the Harmonik mic system as compared to an external mic.
Thanks to everyone for their input. Many good observations.

 

[debra]

...
The internal Harmonik mics can sound very good with a touch of compression and EQ but I did detect some "hot spot" of the notes directly in front of the mic capsules.
...

For me that was the clearest sign that C was the Harmonik. Once you notice the "hot spot" effect of internal mics you cannot "unhear" it and it will always bother you. But with a tremolo register the effect is even worse than with a dry tone because of part of the tremolo being "cancelled out" by the two capsules capturing the sound of a single note, from different distance.
All in all this was a very interesting experiment, and I feel even happier than before that I make my own recordings with a pair of AKG mics!

 

[JerryPH]

I feel even happier than before that I make my own recordings with a pair of AKG mics!

There is a lot of talk about the C414. There are in fact, now 3 versions of it... the original XLS, XLII and the latest one, the B-ULS that is shown here. Amongst the people that use them, the one thing that all seem to agree on is that the original XLS still has the best sound. The XLII kind of falls on it's face slightly and that the B-ULS has the technically cleanest but most generic sound and is the newest design. Looking

The XLS and XLII use a brass ring and different internal electronics from the B-ULS which is the newest one and has a plastic ring. They say that the B-ULS was designed with the goal of having a more neutral and pure sound, and the UL in its name stands for "Ultra linear". Fun fact, at the time of this post, if you go to the AKG website and search for the C414 B-ULS, you won't even find it!



My opinion is that at this level, you need the ears of a bat to differentiate.
The tiniest thing makes a difference, room acoustics, distance what is being recorded, what preamps are being used, at what quality levels you are recording and even cables make audible differences. Heck, I can change the sound of my mics by simply rotating myself and the mics 20-30 degrees left or right.

For me that was the clearest sign that C was the Harmonik. Once you notice the "hot spot" effect of internal mics you cannot "unhear" it and it will always bother you.

I was interested in hearing this on my Petosa with the Harmonik mics, but I was just not hearing any hot spots on the raw recording. On mine its the AC 5001-Plus and its a different accordion, so those can be factors. Who knows, perhaps when I get the chance to fool around some more, I'll try again.

Talking about comparisons, when I was shopping around for what mics to get for me, I tested over 40 different condenser and dynamic mics and roughly 15 or more recording devices over a good period of time. At the time, the recording device I was looking for was something small portable and high quality with a ton of gain.

The search for my perfect mics drove me nuts, and heck, I even sparked a full out verbal fight on an audio forum as to if getting a matched pair of mics or 2 unmatched mics of the same kind made a difference!

In the end that became a non-issue as the mic that I finally ended up choosing (SE Electronics SE4400a) were available in a matched pair, larger case and sound bar for $1 less than if I bought 2 separate mics. Basically, these emulate the sound of the original C414XLS but add a tiny,barely audible, touch of "air" up top to add a little sparkle. Compared to the C414XLII on my ears, I found these sounded more natural on accordions than all the other mics, C414XLII included. The fact that they were half the price of the AKGs was a plus, though at the time, I had the money aside for the AKG;s, if I wanted. I feel that one kind of pays a lot for the name, and you really don't have to.

That mic comparison looks like fun, I may have to try the same thing with the mics that I own, though I already know what will happen, it may be a fun video to make that others might enjoy.

 

[debra]

...
I was interested in hearing this on my Petosa with the Harmonik mics, but I was just not hearing any hot spots on the raw recording. On mine its the AC 5001-Plus and its a different accordion, so those can be factors. Who knows, perhaps when I get the chance to fool around some more, I'll try again.
...

What matters most in hearing or not hearing any "hot spots" is the distance of the mics from the soundboard. So if the grille offers more room for installing the mics it reduces the hot spots issue.
Back in the days when I was using Microvox mics that go on the outside of the grille (with 4 capsules) I added another inch (2.5cm) or do distance by hanging the mic bar under a bracket (kept in place using the decorative bolts that hold the grille in place). We never had an issue with hot spots then, but of course the feedback-suppression is better when mics are installed under the grille.

 

[JerryPH]

Placement within the grill is for sure a factor, and then we hit accordions that have near no room under the grill (ie my Gola).

 

[Ventura]

just for the newbies, so you have another philosophy to
consider, VS this mic made it sound more ____ or this amp
sounded better than ____

one is presumed to be starting with an accordion of which you
like the sound.. the way it sounds.. he balance of sound.. the blend..

therefore

the only purpose of any and all Microphones is to capture that sound
WITHOUT CHANGING IT in any way shape or form

and beyond that

the only purpose of any and all Amplifier systems is to simply and
merely and with perfect accuracy MAKE IT LOUDER without changing
it in any way shape or form

the only times one should need tone shaping of any sort is when
THE ROOM/SPACE in which you are playing is messing with your
tone by absorbing some frequencies and through reflections
amplifying others, at which time you use your ears to adjust the
tone or you employ the built in analyzer
(some peavey and bose systems have this built in)
(many pro-sound guys have similar electronics built
into their racks of PA gear to analyze and adjust the overall
tone for big venues)

or

you are playing very very softly but need to amplify so the entire
room hears the sound at reasonable volume, which is to simply
use the "smile" curve on your equalizer, or hit the loudness button
if there is one, or just turn up the treble and bass tone controls..

the loudness curve generally speaking boosts the lower bass
and higher treble frequencies, tricking the ear into thinking
the overall balance is the same as it is when the music is actually loud

or

you don't have helikon Bass but want that depth for your Oktoberfest
so you mic and amplify the Bass separately and process it with
Bass Booster and Octaver and other such tone shaping stuff
to make it sound like thunder

this is why you look at specs for the raw equipment.. the speakers,
the mic capsules.. to look at the frequency range, how flat it is
how accurate (plus or minus 1db from 20-20,000 Hertz is nice)
and if the raw equipment has limitations, how can you build a system
the overcomes that (multiple speakers and custom crossover networks)
or understanding the frequency range of your instrument or voice
and choosing accordionly devices that cover that range.

personally i love my sound, and that is largely because
i never ever allow equipment to mess with it, only to support it,
so this alternate philosophy can work, though it can be more
expensive and take a lot of effort and experimentation
and custom crafting
(15" speaker drivers in big cabinets and such)

just sayin'

 

[debra]

Placement within the grill is for sure a factor, and then we hit accordions that have near no room under the grill (ie my Gola).

I actually wanted to install mics in my AKKO bayan and found that there was nearly no room under the grille... On one side, where the register mechanism goes from outside to inside, the diagonal rods were completely in the way. So I ended up using the mics in a different accordion (my bass accordion) that has a lot of room under the grille. When I need to perform with my AKKO I will simply revert to the old and faithful Microvox system.

 

[JerryPH]

When I need to perform with my AKKO I will simply revert to the old and faithful Microvox system.

Oh thanks for reminding me! My friend Paul from the museum gave me an old external mic system (has to be dynamic mics) that have a band that holds on via the bellows straps and goes over the grill, that would be an interesting experiment... I have no idea what kind or even how many mics are in this thing!

 

[jozz]

I didn't use any post processing such as compression or EQ as those adjustments are subjective and will vary by who is applying the processing. I wanted to demonstrate the sound of the mic itself as a starting point. I see from the members that responded, opinions on the mics also varied. Personally, I liked the recording through the Sennheiser MD441 best, Mic B.
The placement of the mics was deceptive due to the position and angle of the camera. The center of the mic capsules were 2 inches apart, as close as I was able to get them. The mics were aimed at the curve of the grill at the middle of the grill (circle in attached photo). The Harmonik model I have does not have the tone controls that Jerry referred to, just volume controls for bass and treble.
The internal Harmonik mics can sound very good with a touch of compression and EQ but I did detect some "hot spot" of the notes directly in front of the mic capsules. For performing live in a group, I am sold on the Harmonik mic system as compared to an external mic.
Thanks to everyone for their input. Many good observations.

Can you post a pic of the harmonik system installed under the grille? In the near future I'm going to mic a box and leaning towards trying something different then my usual Sennheiser kit
this gives me an idea of how easy/difficult the install is going to be

 

[96Bass]

Here is a video detailing installation of the Harmonik system.
I have a Beltuna with a Sennheiser mic system. I prefer the Harmonik over the Sennheiser by a long shot. Better sound quality and higher gain before feedback. I believe that Jerry might have both systems as well, perhaps he could give his opinion on which he likes best.