Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Robert Alan]

i have used this mic in a setting of loud rock/metal bands in rehearsal spaces as well as on stage in small-medium sized clubs. i have a wide vocal range that is melodic(think along the lines of geoff tate from queensryche). the mics sound is very present (though not in a overly harsh way like a beta 58 can be sometimes) i find it to be very clear (clearer than a Beta58), transient and crisp sounding. because the mic is very present it might not suit some who have a bright or thin voice (something like an sennheiser e845 or audix OM6 would be better in that senario) . its presence is also usefull when you need the vocals the cut through the mix or when a band is very loud but once again it may sound a little thin or pinched sometimes - lacking a bit of bottom end, though it does seem to translate a wide vocal ride quite well especially in the highs. i have found that this mic sometimes picks up a little more handling noise than some other mics i have used but it isnt of a boomy nature more that it picks up a higher pitched sort of handling noise.i have found that genrally i have had good results with gain before feedback though i have found that when/if  mic does feed back it seems harder to fix than some other mics (though this is just probably me haha). i think this has something to do with the mics pick up pattern, for instance although the mic is a tight hyper cardiod its biggest of axis angle is 180-150 degress - dont know just think theres something weird going on there?.   overall i think the OM5 is very good and that you should definatly check out if you looking for a vocal mic ( and to anyone considering getting a shure beta58 make sure you check this out!)

[Tim Padrick]

A friend got a couple and liked them.  So I got some and liked them.  We both soon found that we didn't like them so much - that they were just as nasty as the usual mics, but with different nasties that took some time to irritate us.

I got some OM7s and liked them.  Several years on I still like them just as much.  Ditto for my friend.

I did keep an OM6, but only because it's a better "talking head" mic than the OM7.

[Robert Alan]

 when you say nasties do you mean sound or performance wise?

im certainly starting to notice the more i use it how middy and a bit pinched sounding it can be. no where near as bad as a Beta 58 though and alot cleaer too!

[Robert Alan]

 i was looking at the OM5's round polar chart and i thought it quite strange. on the polar chart it has an added ring that cant be included in measuring the mics off axis rejection (as it isnt actually touching the front of the mic at 0 degrees) but without taking into account the added ring alot of the mics higher frequencies, 4000, 8000, 1600 are only 15 db's down? (some of the lower ones are even less) that isnt exacly great rejection!
unless your ment to use tons of EQ?

this doesnt corrispond with the frequencies on the on and off axis graph though?


http://www.audixusa.com/Acrobat/OM5_spec_sheet.pdf


http://www.audixusa.com/spec_sheets.html

[Bennett Prescott]

Robert, those polar charts (and the SPL/Freq. chart above them) are smoothed to death, have no listed tolerances, and say nothing about the means used to acquire them. They're worse than useless, and comparing them to any other polar chart by any other manufacturer (or perhaps even the same manufacturer!) isn't going to tell you anything other than "this is really confusing".

I'm guessing that each deviation in the polar charts is 5db... that means that above 1Khz (where I see almost all feedback problems) the mic is 25-30dB down. That's incredibly good. However, it's probably incredibly meaningless. I suspect it's 5dB worse than that, which is still excellent rejection. Remember, you can even get an omni mic pretty hot if you've got a vocalist who stays right on it, simply because of the difference in SPL between something a centimeter away and everything else in the room.

[Tim Padrick]

Robert Alan wrote on Sun, 16 July 2006 19:44

when you say nasties do you mean sound or performance wise?........

I just don't like the way they sound.  But then I've yet to hear a mic that I do like the sound of - at least not one that can be used on a noisy rock stage, or where a lot of system gain is required.  IME the OM7 is the best of the "junk" mics (mics that can be used on noisy rock stages or systems where lots of gain are required). I want to try the AE5400, to see if it works where the VX10 and KMS105 ("mediocre mics") will not.