Ribbon Mic: RB500 vs APEX 205

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Violinist

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
80
Location
België
I'm oriented to buy a Ribbon Mic in order to record Violin, Flute and Sax (Tenor Sax)

I've been reading some very interesting post in this Forum and I would like to ask to you what do you suggest between these two cheap mic models, please:

RB500 (t.bone)
APEX 205

I thank you very much for your suggestions/explanations.
 
Buy a shiny Box Ribbon MIC. Shiny Box Started out of the forum and Jon who owns and operates Shiny box is a really nice guy. Do yourself a favor and look those up
 
I saw them, I like them, they are out of my Budget.

Please don't take me wrong but I would like to remain on topic, I re-propose my question please. What do you suggest between these two cheap mic models, please:

RB500 (t.bone)
APEX 205

I thank you very much for your indications/helps
 
Violinist said:
I saw them, I like them, they are out of my Budget.

Please don't take me wrong but I would like to remain on topic, I re-propose my question please. What do you suggest between these two cheap mic models, please:

RB500 (t.bone)
APEX 205

I thank you very much for your indications/helps

I think they both play in the same league (made in the same factory) and they have same ribbon motor and transformers maybe a little different iirc, but can't tell wich one will make your violin sound like a stradivarius...none will do...
I have RB500, and they are ok, but i changed the trannys, and they are "better" now....

If this can help?

PS: For the price you could still buy both of them, and compare  :-\ :p :D
 
zayance said:
but can't tell wich one will make your violin sound like a stradivarius

If this can help?

Well, even a Stradivarius can play horribly if the violinist is horrible  ;D

Anyhow, it's my interest to avoid some "harsh sound", or "too metallic sound" (I don't know how to define it to make clear what I mean) that normally I got with Condenser.
I tried also some dynamic but I was not satisfied at all with the color the Dynamic capsule normally gives.

I was reading a lot about the Ribbon ones and I found these two types quite affordable for my wallet in this moment.

That's why my question :)

Another reason is: what I never found is a comparison between condenser and ribbon applied to a violin.

I found with a Cello (in YouTUBE, and the difference is evident. In this case I really prefer the Ribbon one), with acoustic guitar (in this case I'm really satisfied with my Condenser), Voices and the omnipresent: electric guitar.

Never seen comparisons with: Violin (as I said), Sax (tenor or alto), violin, flute so that I couldn't yet have a real idea of the difference.

As far as I understood from  your answer: the RB500 and the APEX205 are identical but cosmetics ?
 
the RB500 and the APEX205 are identical but cosmetics ?

Yes i believe Apex 205 is just a little thinner, but inside both are the same....

But are you using a Condenser in the same price range as the Ribbon? If yes, than i guess that's where is your harsh sound,
as most of the cheap condensers tend to have a high boost...

Ever tried a Shure KSM141 in Omni mode? Or whatever "good" condenser in Omni mode? Well all depends on the place where you record the violin also...

 
because I need one mic :)

That's what most people say, and some have done great stuff with only one mic.
But still i think there is not one mic for all instruments...

But get whatever of both you'll get cheap, and hear for yourself....
And for a rookie mod you can just take out carefully all the grills inside the headbasket, living just the main exterior one,
search in google you'll find some infos on that, it opens up the sound a little, but the mic becomes VERY fragile to whatever air pressure you'll get to it, close windows...
 
zayance said:
because I need one mic :)

That's what most people say, and some have done great stuff with only one mic.
But still i think there is not one mic for all instruments...

I fully agree with you, Zayance. My phrase would liked just to say: I need only one Ribbon one.
 
zayance said:
I have 2 RB500 and they find their use  :)
Fine  :)

I will check in Thomann and I will provide with the order.
Please, you told before you changed the transformer and you get better functioning. Where can I find these transformer please?
 
Please, you told before you changed the transformer and you get better functioning. Where can I find these transformer please?

It's been a while now, don't remember where i got them, will have to check that, but try them without tranny mod first....
 
Violinist said:
I'm oriented to buy a Ribbon Mic in order to record Violin, Flute and Sax (Tenor Sax)

I've been reading some very interesting post in this Forum and I would like to ask to you what do you suggest between these two cheap mic models, please:

RB500 (t.bone)
APEX 205

I thank you very much for your suggestions/explanations.

I don't think there is much of the difference between those two. Both of them are using the same ribbon motor lifted from AEA ribbon mic (IIRC, R84) but of course, due to implementation have quite a bit different sonic qualities.

Over the years the ribbon corrugation in those models became much better, however, the main problem remains the same--it is not the transformer, but the ribbon thickness. Do not believe advertised 2.5um! It is 6um--the readily available material Chinese have!

The 6um is very heavy, prone to resonances, and is far from being an optimal thing. It is ironic however, that for hours we can scream the differences between U87 and say MXL2001, but if we talk ribbons, with all their imperfections either RB500 or 205 still would be quite a capable performer... as any ribbon is. I don't think you can go wrong with either, as long as you know and realize their limitations.

Best, M     
 
Hello Marik

thank you very much to you too, for your suggestions.
I'm astonished about this sentence:

"Do not believe advertised 2.5um! It is 6um--the readily available material Chinese have!"

I thought it was forbidden to sell any product with "fake" declared characteristics.
I know that Chinese production don't care about correctness, but I'm wondered about Thomann that has commissioned the t.bone line, under these conditions.

I watched a video in YouTUBE that shows the evident differences between 6µm and thinner one (as far as I remember it was 1.8µm). Even if intuitively the difference there is, the video shows it univocally
 
I think, even with the limitations/"these could be better", those mics are by far the best mic for that kind of money.



I have a rb500.
 
I will try to buy one and to try it.

I discovered that the APEX 205 is not imported in Europe (as far as the information I got is true, but I have not yet found it), so that I will check the RB500 ;)
 
I have an RB500, and I wondered for some time why it sounded like sh*t (I wasn't too disappoinred because I didn't expect much).
I found out that its actual impedance is 2500 ohms, which may be more or less ok if you use it in a cheap unbalanced mixer, but when I tried it with my preamps (ISA430 MkII, Avalon 737SP, UA LA610) I was wondering where my tweeters were gone!
I had some discussions, in particular with Rossi (he's a member here, and he knows a lot about mics so you should PM him and check his posts) and I found out that there are several generations of RB500, with the impedance going from 250 to 2500 ohms! I don't know what's the gospel about it today, but I wouldn't certainly recommend one, considering you have no way of knowing beforehand.
The only way to make it half-usable was to mate it with a FEThead http://tritonaudio.com/index.php?sectionid=4&option=com_content&task=category&id=17&Itemid=33
The 22k input Z is certainly more friendly than the typical 1-2k.
 
I've been reading today the following review:

http://www.joshwoodward.com/n/apex_205_review.html

and of course some question is rising, because if APEX205 and RB500 are identical, I suppose that the issue of one is automatically the issue of the second one.
I'm referring to the "hiss" described in the article and specifically at the phrase "but they're fairly noisy mics".
Did you get same issue with?

I have also some technical doubt, related to the issue above: How can be generated a so strong "hiss" by a passive circuit that hasn't any other component than a transformer and a "quite common" motor?
Is that an issue that may be generated by the transformer itself?
 
Violinist said:
and of course some question is rising, because if APEX205 and RB500 are identical, I suppose that the issue of one is automatically the issue of the second one.
I am not sure they are identical. Apparently there are several variations, and one "badge-engineer" might want a different set of compromises than an other.
I'm referring to the "hiss" described in the article and specifically at the phrase "but they're fairly noisy mics".
Did you get same issue with?
Definitely, if used without any precaution on a standard preamp. The worst match I had was with a GT "The Brick", which has an actual input impedance of 500r; in that case, the mismatch between the 2500r source impedance and the 500r input Z creates a loss of 15dB, which impacts directly the S/N ratio.
I have also some technical doubt, related to the issue above: How can be generated a so strong "hiss" by a passive circuit that hasn't any other component than a transformer and a "quite common" motor?
This question needs to be answered in two parts:
First, a resistor has intrinsic noise, because it is at room temperature, which agitates the electrons. This noise has been measured by Johnson and quantified by Nyquist. Noise is proportional to the sq root of the resistance, the sq root of the BW and the sq root of the temperature (in °K i.e. room temperature is 300°K).
A 200r resistor at room temperature produces a noise voltage of -129.7dBu in a 20Hz-20kHz BW. My RB500, with its 2500r impedance (which is mainly resistive except for a slight hump at about 200Hz) produces a self-noise of -117.8dBu. That's 11dB more self-noise of electric origin. Why have they done that? Probably because customers complained about the low level of the first versions, that were indeed about 250r. But it is not without consequences.
Second, The actual S/N ratio depends on the sensitivity of the microphone, i.e. the voltage delivered for a certain SPL level, on what actual level is fed to the preamp, and on the accumulation of all noises. Room noise is related to the actual surface of the diaphragm, electrical noise is the accumulation of self-noise due to the resistance of the element, preamp noise is the result of the input circuit's intrinsic noise performane AND the actual amount of gain needed to elevate the tiny microphone signal to the system's operating level.

As you see, it's a quite complex subject, but it's easy to demonstrate that, all oter parameters being equal, two mic ribbons differeng only by the ratio of their transformers (and as a consequence, their impedance) will produce different results in terms of noise.
Is that an issue that may be generated by the transformer itself?
The xfmr, with its unavoidable losses, will just make matters slightly worse.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top