Rode HF1 capsule for DIY mic

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

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

Nen'O

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2022
Messages
179
Location
Greece
Anyone familiar with Rode HF1 capsule ?
Is it worth the money?
How does to compare to order OEM edge terminated capsule available at market ?

Cheers
 
Anyone familiar with Rode HF1 capsule ?
Is it worth the money?
How does to compare to order OEM edge terminated capsule available at market ?

Cheers
A great example of how polarizing this topic can be. I, for example, like that capsule very much. It is flatter (less HF boost) and more balanced than most capsules of this type available. Since it's Røde, it is highly consistent from piece to piece, back to front. It's the one found in Classic II. It is not to be mistaken for the original CK12 type though.
 
Last edited:
The red one is HF1 against two other OEM capsules of the same type. Disregard the quirks around 50hz, the capsules are measured nude without any shielding hence inconsistencies at that frequency.

EDIT:
Like any other capsule, the body/headbasket/circuit will impact how this capsule comes across. So if you've heard it in a less than ideal body, or wrong context this could be the reason you didn't like it.

It lives in between the worlds. Not bright as a k67, or scooped as ck12. Not dark enough used in flat circuit to be compared to u67, u87. Nothing in common with k47. It is actually closest to Shure ksm44. This mic suffers from same critiques, clean, it doesn't fit any of the previously mentioned stereotypes. Yet a great mic in it's own right.
 

Attachments

  • 20230429_165447.jpg
    20230429_165447.jpg
    1.5 MB
Last edited:
A great example of how polarizing this topic can be. I, for example, like that capsule very much. It is flatter (less HF boost) and more balanced than most capsules of this type available. Since it's Røde, it is highly consistent from piece to piece, back to front. It's the one found in Classic II. It is not to be mistaken for the original CK12 type though.
I may be thinking of the original edge terminated capsule.
 
The red one is HF1 against two other OEM capsules of the same type. Disregard the quirks around 50hz, the capsules are measured nude without any shielding hence inconsistencies at that frequency.

EDIT:
Like any other capsule, the body/headbasket/circuit will impact how this capsule comes across. So if you've heard it in a less than ideal body, or wrong context this could be the reason you didn't like it.

It lives in between the worlds. Not bright as a k67, or scooped as ck12. Not dark enough used in flat circuit to be compared to u67, u87. Nothing in common with k47. It is actually closest to Shure ksm44. This mic suffers from same critiques, clean, it doesn't fit any of the previously mentioned stereotypes. Yet a great mic in it's own right.
And now I'm thinking about grabbing a pair of NT2000s.
 
And now I'm thinking about grabbing a pair of NT2000s.
I have Nt2A, and i sold my KSM44, as i felt it would be redundant. If appreciated for what these are, low noise, clean, high headroom mics, I can certainly see use for them.

If capsule is used in some other circuit some dirt could make them more lively. The Classic II is actually the only one that uses plate out topology in combo with this capsule, and offers some dirt. Could be the reason it's popular. Other Rode tube mics are cathode out, and very clean. I also can see how they can be used in u87 circuit with less HF attenuation is used.

I have even made a variant with RLC filter to gently dip the midrange and make these sound more CK12 like. Maybe -2db at 1K.
 
I have Nt2A, and i sold my KSM44, as i felt it would be redundant. If appreciated for what these are, low noise, clean, high headroom mics, I can certainly see use for them.

If capsule is used in some other circuit some dirt could make them more lively. The Classic II is actually the only one that uses plate out topology in combo with this capsule, and offers some dirt. Could be the reason it's popular. Other Rode tube mics are cathode out, and very clean. I also can see how they can be used in u87 circuit with less HF attenuation is used.

I have even made a variant with RLC filter to gently dip the midrange and make these sound more CK12 like. Maybe -2db at 1K.
I'm interested in the NT2000 as a cheap (I plan to buy used) clean utility mic that's a little closer to what I want than the CAD M179 is, though I guess I could always just throw new capsules in those.
I want something with a little less high end than the Lewitt mics and the CAD M179, but that's a bit brighter than a U87.
 
Last edited:
I like my NT2000s. They are a bit clean and hard sounding for some applications but they take EQ well. They give a more accurate representation of (for example) a steel-strung acoustic guitar than my Brauner Phantheras, which add a kind of sheen to the high frequencies. The Phantheras sound pleasant, but sometimes a harder edge is needed to cut through a mix. The NT2000s do this well.

If you can afford it I'd go for the NT2000 over the NT2A for the extra flexibility. My most-used pattern on these is hypercardioid, which the NT2A doesn't provide.
 
Last edited:
Hi again,

I have 2 old capsules taken for NT2 A in bad condition.
Think it’s HF 1 model .
Is there someone in EU who could reskinning? It’s shame to have them to go waisted.

Thanks

IMG_0142.jpeg
 
Don't think they need reskin, just some cleaning. If that's all the gold missing from the diaphragm, it's not that bad.
Hi,
That’s great news! I can definitely give it a try. Anyways only the back side is missing some gold, front is in much better condition(photo attached).
I’ve never cleaned capsule diaphragms, how to do it?

Thanks heaps!!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0145.jpeg
    IMG_0145.jpeg
    2.3 MB
@Nen'O please disregard the comment above, as you will see in the posts in the threads i linked to, alcohol of any kind could potentially start flaking the gold layer which is already damaged on your capsule. If you have to, and brush on it's own isn't enough, use just distilled water.

some time ago i found this video. For creating alcohol solution possible use some vodka from shop. Isopropyl alcohol is not recommended

Please refrain from potentially damaging comments.
 
Ok i am not pro. If any kind of problem with this stuff then i not recommend it. But there only 20% solution of alcohol in use. And not always possible clean old dirt just with water.

So i also think use just water for cleaning. But i don't have too much dirty capsules like this. And i think in some case still better some alcohol solution in use than just try finish all just with water even in it is not really possible.

So i won't here damage or waste any old school capsules. And in my opinion better start cleaning from already damaged side then you will know you possibly for cleaning without risk of damage important side.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top