C4 studio
"Some further info on the company- looks legit. The site is: Here are some of the quotes from the group: OK guys, there's some highly controvercial stuff going on in the newsgroup right now regarding a company in Beijing, China called 797 Audio. Here is a thread with more info circa 2000 from : companyįor several mic companys such as Rode, MXL etc. You will notice the behringer mics are virtually the same as their own brand (797audio). Here's an update: Behringer mic's are built in China (using Behringer design. DOA) but I have had good luck and will continue to keep them in my top ten list. Also I understand the biggest problem with Behringer ( I also have a Eurorack MX1604A mixer circa 2001 which is incredible!!!) is consistent quality (ie. Thanks for your review as you have sold me on the B5. I am now looking to pick up a small condenser and have looked at the Behringer B5's as well as Rode NT5 ($219.00) and Shure SM81 ($349.00) but for a fraction of the price for these I can get a B5 for $79. When I tried the mic out in my home studio I was blown away.
C4 studio pro#
But 1 reviewer sold me who was a long time professional recording engineer who also has several high end mics (Neumann etc.) and stated that The B2 Pro was incredible for the price and he felt it would match up with mics $400 -> $1000 range. I just recently purchased the Behringer B2 Pro !!!) large condenser mic after reading tons of reviews good/bad. In most cases, I have found that actual measured response is often far worse than the factory response chart illustrates(usually very heavily smoothed, and sometimes, peaks are not shown that actually exist). Note: Do not assume factory response plots are represenative of actual response. I don't know of any mic comparable to the B5 for less than many hundreds of dollars - though that does not mean it does not exist a comparable unit for the same or less - I just have not come across it yet. This is a serious quality mic for a penny pincher price, based on actual measured performance. The B5 can withstand substial SPL before it clips. The B5 can easily be used as a reference grade mic, if accuracy/neutrality is your objective.
Noise performance is good on the C4, and even better on the B5. Due to the broad nature, it will rather audible, as compared to the narrow peaks on the B-5. The C4 has up to 3dB semi-broad peak in the mid treble band. The omni capsule is also flatter response, about +/- 1.5dB, from 50Hz-15kHz, on the B-5, with two narrow peaks, one about 1.5dB and the other about 2dB in magnitude, in the mid-treble. The C4 has substantial, wide 5 dB peak in the treble with the cardoid, while the B-5's cardoid is relatively flat, within a couple of dBs, through the entire bandwidth. The B-5 has a flatter response, with both the omni and cardoid capsules. The B-5 has better machine work(C4 has sloppier threads, edges, etc.). I have inspected/analyzed/measured both microphones under heavily controlled conditions. But I have the answer to the thread if anyone wants to know the truth. I take it that raising the ceiling is out of You considered a pair of omnis? The AT4051 also is a pretty good cardioid The wide pattern works better for me on drum >The main reason I'll put up a MXL-603s sometimes is because of the wide cardiod I don't use them and probably should sell them. >couple of MXL-63M's (Mars) cheap and the electronics in them were similiar to
C4 studio mod#
>I did mod my MXL-V67G and that was an improvement. Problems that I decided it wasn't worth spending a lot of time on the I have not done the SDs at all, mostly because they have enough capsule >when he was with Marshall and he cleaned them up (noise) and sent me back a
C4 studio mods#
>Did you do the Dorsey Mods on the MXL603?