I think my new Rode NT1-A can be fake.

[Icantthinkofaname]

There's the Rode NT3 which is hypercardioid. Super useful and great sounding mic. There's a mod for lowering the HF boost i came up with if that's an issue. No high spl limit problems, i used it as a main vocal mic for 10 years, spitting, bumping, falling, plosive bombardment 4 days a week on average, still as good as new but with even better low end response compared to new ones. I guess the diaphragm relaxed a bit over time. Which is a good thing.

I thought that was a cardioid mic since that's what Rode's website says.

 

[kingkorg]

I thought that was a cardioid mic since that's what Rode's website says.

Weird. I wonder if they changed the specs along the way. If you google Røde nt3 hypercardioid it still shows up as such a lot of places.

 

[mhelin]

Unfortunately an impulse response does not include nonlinearities, by nature. An impulse response includes linear changes only.

Might be, don't know the theory of linear system well enough. Some use Volterra series for analyzing nonlinearities, goes too deep into math, for an example this paper on tube amp and mic pre analysis:
https://arts.units.it/retrieve/hand...ni Terenzi Cecchi Piazza Carini-PostPrint.pdf

 

[gyraf]

..the mentioned "Multiple-Variance Method" still has an estimate of significant contributors as a prerequisite. This probably why subjectively nice nonlinearities is the main area not yet solved in software..

/Jakob E.

 

[k brown]

. . . nobody likes a 'mean' nonlinearity . . .

 

[Sammas]

We can see that is true from the prices asked - and apparently received - for certain items of audio equipment.
At the end of the day any - and I mean any - deviation from linearity in the audio chain will introduce distortion.
Now that distortion may be perceived as 'attractive' by some, and offensive to others..... But it is all still distortion, from an engineering point of view.
People have made fortunes - for example - from the non linearity introduced into valve (tube) based guitar amplifiers. Often by mistake - or simply bad design, but considered desirable by many folk.

I suspect the lowest distortion figures in microphones probably come from the 'push-pull' capsules fitted to the Sennheiser RF mics .
That should make them the most desirable, technically, but I'm not sure that's true?
The non linearity (distortion) introduced by various - notably tube based - microphones from suppliers like Neumann is often deemed highly desirable.
And of course Neumann will obviously capitalise on that reputation...... Why wouldn't they?

When 'upstart' companies like Rode came along and start introducing much cheaper microphones that actually perform quite well, the professional microphone 'establishment' are inclined to automatically ridicule the performance of these imposters.
It's the same story in many other aspects of audio electronics.... Certain model Hammond organs, certain Fender and Gibson guitars, certain Vox and Marshall amplifiers all have almost religious followings.
Objectively, many of their supposed 'superior' attributes are often nonsense. Subjectively, it's a totally different story.

There are some very capable marketing folk around. You just have to try and make sense of what is valid, and what is BS.
And it's not easy....I suspect we've all made the odd expensive mistake by getting that wrong, along the way!

Rigorous scientific method is really the thing that matters. Not just going through the motions of "hey, I used my ears to do *something* so this must be 100% conclusive".

Just as an example, I could post two audio files here that were recorded with an MKH8050 and an MKH50. We might all conclude they sound identical. We might all conclude they sound totally different, and one is a clear winner. But those conclusions ultimately don't matter because as soon as you put them both onto the end of a boom pole or microphone stand, you start realising you can be in for some wildly different experiences. That is the difference between a deviation from linearity in an anechoic chamber, and a deviation from linearity in the real world. Proximity effect, pickup patterns, immunity to bleed, susceptibility to handling noise, immunity to breath noise, physical size and weight. It all matters.

Floyd Toole basically smashed the speaker industry to the ground by displaying how detached anechoic measurements are from real world results. Nobody listens to speakers in an anechoic chamber. For a speaker to be accurate, it is the linearity from the perspective of the listening position that matters. Through decades of subjective listening tests, he figured out the complex relationship between speaker designs, room interactions and human hearing. From that, he formulated a prediction model for in-room response, based on anechoic measurements... because what is happening in a real room is the only thing that matters.

I would suggest that your line of thinking is very reminiscent of those old speaker manufacturers. It isn't the linearity of a microphone in a test chamber that ultimately matters. It is the linearity of the voice it is recording... or the guitar... or the piano. That real world situation explicitly relies on every attribute of a microphone design, right down to its physical size and weight and whether or not it will fit comfortably in the space available. A/D converter listening tests using audio files work, because they inherently have fewer real world variables than microphones. The rigorous scientific method is just plain simpler to implement.

Personally, I would never mutter Rode and Neumann in the same sentence. The factory tour I had left me feeling uneasy. I have never toured the Neumann factory, but I doubt it is the same experience. They certainly started differently - one a family owned business hand making microphones 80 years ago. The other importing china microphones and modifying them. I was at Rode two days after the owner had spent $9M USD on a guitar owned by Kurt Cobain. There was a clear divide in terms of ethnicity between the factory floor and management & marketing sitting one level up. The senior management dude who gave us the tour spent most of it criticising audio engineering professions of various kinds. 'Soundfield' was two unoccupied temporary foldout tables in a separate building. With the exception of a guy operating some washing machines related to the 3D printing process, that building had no one else in it. The real icing on the cake was receiving an in-house magazine called 'In-Rodes'. It had an article in it about a collaboration between Rode and Walmart to build a $100million USD performance space in Arkansas.

Before I walked in there I was expecting a lot of passion for the work they do. An enthusiasm for recording. Something reminiscent of the pride and opportunity a 'made in Australia' label can reflect. Perhaps something similar to Beez Neez Microphones. I left thinking "Rode is mass produced crap". And it really is. Useful crap? Absolutely. But you realise how crap it is the moment you slide the case off and sit it next to a Beez Neez microphone, or a Neumann U87. Those things are cheap for a reason.

There really is no substitute to holding microphones in your hands and putting them to work. Whether or not the purchase price is worth it to you, is a whole different equation. Given that a U47 purchased 10 years ago has tripled in value... I would say with absolute certainty that unless a microphone is German and hasn't been made for 70 years, it comparatively really isn't worth a damn.

 

[MicMaven]

Personally, I would never mutter Rode and Neumann in the same sentence.

Ah ... but you just did !!

James - K8JHR -

* Just poking a little fun. Seriously, however, I have no beef with the point of your missive. Was the factory setup really that cheap? I have seen videos hosted by Rode's CEO and he seemed to say they make all their own parts from scratch with machines and processes they invent in house ... is that Not So, Dick Tracy? JHR

 

[Sammas]

Ah ... but you just did !!

James - K8JHR -

* Just poking a little fun. Seriously, however, I have no beef with the point of your missive. Was the factory setup really that cheap? I have seen videos hosted by Rode's CEO and he seemed to say they make all their own parts from scratch with machines and processes they invent in house ... is that Not So, Dick Tracy? JHR

I never said the factory setup was cheap. They have spent an absolute fortune on it to make a lot of their components in house...

It is just that the investment and innovation and processes are clearly there to drive mass production more than anything else. That is what Rode do - they are one of the biggest mass producers of microphones in the world. It was constantly mentioned how they were always striving for even greater and greater quantities.

There is nothing inherently wrong that it. Just don't confuse 'in-house' to mean something artisan, or made by people who even like microphones. When I was standing on the CNC floor watching those machines spit out exactly the same component over and over again into big portable hoppers, I suddenly realised that I could be standing in a factory anywhere in the world.

...though there are probably relatively few factories in the world who make microphones in the same quantity as Rode.

 

[Whoops]

If you'd ever used one of the SDCs fitted with the NT45-O omni capsule, you wouldn't say that. Someone as successful and in-demand as Tony Faulkner has no need to shill for a mic company.

One thing that's for sure, you never used and listened to a Schoeps CMC microphone.
When you use a Schoeps microphone the expected standards became much higher.

 

[k brown]

One thing that's for sure, you never used and listened to a Schoeps CMC microphone.
When you use a Schoeps microphone the expected standards became much higher.

Faulkner sure makes beautiful recordings for someone who must be stone deaf.

The only Rodes I've ever used are the SDCs with the omni capsule; I have no idea what their other mics are like - but my experience of the omni tracks with TF's.

http://greenroomproductions.biz/?p=29

 

[MicMaven]

Faulkner sure makes beautiful recordings

Gee ... he has worked for so many outfits ... pity he cannot hold a job !

Seriously - the guy does not even own a U87 . . . James/K8JHR

 

[rogs]

..... Personally, I would never mutter Rode and Neumann in the same sentence. The factory tour I had left me feeling uneasy. I have never toured the Neumann factory, but I doubt it is the same experience........

I'm sure you're right..... From your description, the Rode factory sound like a modern facility, using modern manufacturing techniques to produce large number of items with consistent quality.
I personally find their products offer excellent results for those of us perhaps considered 'a little further down the food chain' than those folk more used to making world class recordings with international talent, where price is no object?

As to visiting the Neumann factory in comparison, I think you might be a little surprised?
It came as quite a shock to me that they are so confident of their reputation, they can afford to sell power supplies for $1000, fitted with cheap Chinese 'off the shelf' SMPS modules , assembled into what can only be described as poorly constructed units. The metal mounting brackets and wiring looms look really bad. ( See the photos at near the top of this thread : Neumann N149 Schematic )

I'm sure they do make fine units, but it does seem that it might be a bit of a lottery, deciding which devices do retain the legendary Neumann 'quality'....

 

[Whoops]

It came as quite a shock to me that they are so confident of their reputation, they can afford to sell power supplies for $1000, fitted with cheap Chinese 'off the shelf' SMPS modules , assembled into what can only be describes as appallingly constructed units.

I was also shocked with the M149 power supply.
I had one for repair, and was pretty surprised with what I found inside the PSU of a 4600€ microphone.
Also like you said they charge a lot for that PSU, I would never expect Neumann would do something like that.
Saying this, I really like Neumann’s microphones voicings, I like the timbre of most models.

The Rode factory sure looks very well organized, automated and high tech, I’m sure it’s a great factory, but in the end I think Rode choose bad voicings for their microphones.
Voicings that some people consider Over-Bright and Harsh, I include myself there, and those are the characteristics I came to associate Rode with.

 

[soliloqueen]

IMO, user experience and customer care is also important. I would never buy a Neumann for instance because they charge $200 for mounts. I could never want any product they make enough to justify participating in their deeply unethical business practices. Accessibility is also important. Where are the audio manuals? Where's the braille on the mic body? etc.

 

[kingkorg]

I can see all the issues one might have with Røde, even Doug Ford left because of the "toxicity" of the owner. But as someone who worked with Korg for a decade i can just say that is modern day market and how things roll.

My roomate came up with "kingkorg" name for my company way before i started working for Korg. Then they "borrowed" the idea of the name for their KingKorg synth, and almost ended up suing me... I stopped using the name in comercial context...

Røde has design flaws in almost every mic i tested. NT1 has bad headgrille/capsule combo. Even though NT1 black seems to be the same, they resolved this issue, however the grille is still somewhat a problem. They messed up tho with 'Rycote' style capsule holder which resonates and vibrates as crazy at LF. NT3 has that HF boost Doug Ford explained in EEV video which makes the stock mic too bright. Removing it does wonders. I have to say i haven't found any issues with NT-2a so far. It has proven to be exceptionally useful mic.

All this said, being aware of all these issues, I would be comfortable using these mics in any situation, and I have used them. Know your gear and use it accordingly.

 

[soliloqueen]

I can see all the issues one might have with Røde, even Doug Ford left because of the "toxicity" of the owner. But as someone who worked with Korg for a decade i can just say that is modern day market and how things roll.

My roomate came up with "kingkorg" name for my company way before i started working for Korg. Then they "borrowed" the idea of the name for their KingKorg synth, and almost ended up suing me... I stopped using the name in comercial context...

Røde has design flaws in almost every mic i tested. NT1 has bad headgrille/capsule combo. Even though NT1 black seems to be the same, they resolved this issue, however the grille is still somewhat a problem. They messed up tho with 'Rycote' style capsule holder which resonates and vibrates as crazy at LF. NT3 has that HF boost Doug Ford explained in EEV video which makes the stock mic too bright. Removing it does wonders. I have to say i haven't found any issues with NT-2a so far. It has proven to be exceptionally useful mic.

All this said, being aware of all these issues, I would be comfortable using these mics in any situation, and I have used them. Know your gear and use it accordingly.

my personal experience with rode is that their world class manufacturing technology and superb precision is hobbled by a lot of their basic design choices. what's the point of being only +-1um off from wrong?

 

[k brown]

Gee ... he has worked for so many outfits ... pity he cannot hold a job !

Seriously - the guy does not even own a U87 . . . James/K8JHR

U87 is used very, very little by Classical engineers. Decca for example never used it for anything. In fact for most of their heyday the only LDC of any kind they used was M49s for brass spots; never LDCs for mains.

 

[Rowboat]

Rigorous scientific method is really the thing that matters. Not just going through the motions of "hey, I used my ears to do *something* so this must be 100% conclusive".

Just as an example, I could post two audio files here that were recorded with an MKH8050 and an MKH50. We might all conclude they sound identical. We might all conclude they sound totally different, and one is a clear winner. But those conclusions ultimately don't matter because as soon as you put them both onto the end of a boom pole or microphone stand, you start realising you can be in for some wildly different experiences. That is the difference between a deviation from linearity in an anechoic chamber, and a deviation from linearity in the real world. Proximity effect, pickup patterns, immunity to bleed, susceptibility to handling noise, immunity to breath noise, physical size and weight. It all matters.

Floyd Toole basically smashed the speaker industry to the ground by displaying how detached anechoic measurements are from real world results. Nobody listens to speakers in an anechoic chamber. For a speaker to be accurate, it is the linearity from the perspective of the listening position that matters. Through decades of subjective listening tests, he figured out the complex relationship between speaker designs, room interactions and human hearing. From that, he formulated a prediction model for in-room response, based on anechoic measurements... because what is happening in a real room is the only thing that matters.

I would suggest that your line of thinking is very reminiscent of those old speaker manufacturers. It isn't the linearity of a microphone in a test chamber that ultimately matters. It is the linearity of the voice it is recording... or the guitar... or the piano. That real world situation explicitly relies on every attribute of a microphone design, right down to its physical size and weight and whether or not it will fit comfortably in the space available. A/D converter listening tests using audio files work, because they inherently have fewer real world variables than microphones. The rigorous scientific method is just plain simpler to implement.

Personally, I would never mutter Rode and Neumann in the same sentence. The factory tour I had left me feeling uneasy. I have never toured the Neumann factory, but I doubt it is the same experience. They certainly started differently - one a family owned business hand making microphones 80 years ago. The other importing china microphones and modifying them. I was at Rode two days after the owner had spent $9M USD on a guitar owned by Kurt Cobain. There was a clear divide in terms of ethnicity between the factory floor and management & marketing sitting one level up. The senior management dude who gave us the tour spent most of it criticising audio engineering professions of various kinds. 'Soundfield' was two unoccupied temporary foldout tables in a separate building. With the exception of a guy operating some washing machines related to the 3D printing process, that building had no one else in it. The real icing on the cake was receiving an in-house magazine called 'In-Rodes'. It had an article in it about a collaboration between Rode and Walmart to build a $100million USD performance space in Arkansas.

Before I walked in there I was expecting a lot of passion for the work they do. An enthusiasm for recording. Something reminiscent of the pride and opportunity a 'made in Australia' label can reflect. Perhaps something similar to Beez Neez Microphones. I left thinking "Rode is mass produced crap". And it really is. Useful crap? Absolutely. But you realise how crap it is the moment you slide the case off and sit it next to a Beez Neez microphone, or a Neumann U87. Those things are cheap for a reason.

There really is no substitute to holding microphones in your hands and putting them to work. Whether or not the purchase price is worth it to you, is a whole different equation. Given that a U47 purchased 10 years ago has tripled in value... I would say with absolute certainty that unless a microphone is German and hasn't been made for 70 years, it comparatively really isn't worth a damn.

Extremely grateful to have acquired a Bees Kneez Elly. As an expat, I'd like to buy more but I'm on a severely limited budget.

 

[FriedhelmWinter]

Well, gee, fellers ... they do not look the same to me. A copy could have all the same parts - a good copy would put them in the same places. I am anxious to see what Rode says. James

UPD:
Got a reply from Rode, everything's fine, I got a real deal, it's not a counterfeit. Anyway, thank you all for your answers, it was really helpful!