View source for Review / Microphone / Various

<!-- <div style="float:right;max-width:50%"> -->
[[File:Vocal Microphones Banner 1366.jpg|Vocal Microphones]]

{{DivToc
|RightHead = Vocal Microphones for the {{L1}} Review
|RightBody = This is a review of several vocal microphones to be used with the Bose {{L1}} Portable PA Products. <br>This article is applicable to all {{L1}} and L1 Pro models.

Last updated July 2021 to include
* [https://audixusa.com/products/vx5/ Audix VX-5] Condenser, Supercardiod
* [[Sennheiser e 965]] Condenser, Supercardiod/Cardioid
* [[Sennheiser MD 435]] Dynamic, Supercardioid
* [[Sennheiser MD 445]] Dynamic, Cardioid


Originally posted to [https://community.bose.com/t5/Portable-PA/Microphone-Review-Comparison/m-p/314292 the Bose Community in 2004] and updated in 2015, and 2021

{{Editorial ST
|Author = [[User:ST|ST]]
|discussion page = to [https://twitter.com/st_muso Twitter @ST_Muso] or [https://www.linkedin.com/in/stpro/ LinkedIn @STPro] 
}}
|Categories =

    [[Category:How To]]
    [[Category:Product to which this applies]]
    [[Category:Other]]

}} 

== Introduction ==
We examine several vocal microphones for:
* Suitability with the Bose {{L1 nl}} Portable PA systems
* Performing in front of the {{L1}} as intended by the engineers at Bose
* Singing with the close microphone technique using ToneMatch Presets where available

There are several microphones that perform exceedingly well with the Bose L1 systems. You will want to consider the type of music you are performing and the accompaniment as part of your selection criteria. Dynamic microphones may be a better choice for loud music with a busy mix. Condenser microphones are often better for conveying nuanced performances where the vocal is the central theme of the music. 

I have split the review and comparison into two groups: Condenser and dynamic microphones.

=== The Singer and the Stage ===
As a singer, I am looking for a microphone for a male lead vocalist with a darker tone. I struggle to be heard in a loud, busy mix. With the wrong microphone, my voice is inarticulate and muffled. I prefer the detail and articulation I get with a good condenser microphone, over most lower-end dynamic microphones. However, for a loud stage, I will sacrifice fine-grained detail for projection and presence.

== The Lineup == 
These are listed in descending order by list price in $US dollars.
<div class="tocdiv" style="column-rule-style: solid;">
<div>
=== Condenser ===
* [https://en-de.neumann.com/kms-105 Neumann KMS 105] $799 
* [http://rodemicrophones.com/S1WhatsNew.htm Rode S1] $599 
* [http://www.shure.com/americas/products/microphones/beta/beta-87a-vocal-microphone Shure Beta 87a] $462 
* [[Sennheiser e 965]] $399
* [http://www.akg.com/site/products/powerslave,id,262,pid,262,nodeid,2,_language,EN.html AKG C535] $384
* [https://audixusa.com/products/vx5/ Audix VX-5] $249
</div>
<div>
===Dynamic ===
* [[Sennheiser MD 435]] $619
* [[Sennheiser MD 445]] $619
* [[Beyerdynamic M88 N(c)]] $499 
* [https://www.shure.com/en-US/products/microphones/beta_58a Shure Beta 58a] $300
* [http://www.audixusa.com/Acrobat/OM5_spec_sheet.pdf Audix OM5] $265
</div>
<div style="border-style: solid;  border-width: 1px; border-radius: 15px; padding-left: 20px;">
=== Studio Microphones ===
* [[Sony_C48_Microphone|Sony C48]] $1675 
* [https://www.microtechgefell.de/mikrofon?wl=164-UMT70S Microtech Geffel UMT 70S] [[Media:UMT-70-S_kB7eh.pdf|pdf file]] $1,600 
I used the Sony C48 and the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S for baseline reference. These large-diaphragm condenser microphones with switchable patterns; Omni, cardioid, hyper-cardioid, and figure 8. The Microtech Geffel sounds similar to a Neumann U87. It is rumoured that they use the same legendary M7 capsule.
I would not recommend these for frequent live applications.  Neither is suited for hand-held use. <!-- They are better suited for recording given their relatively fragile nature. However, if you don't mind treating them with care, I would use these for an ensemble where you want to use a single microphone. Here, the switchable pattern (omnidirectional) might do very well. 

I have used the AKG C535 and Beyerdynamic M88 for many years, and they are old friends. So I included them in my testing as a basis for comparison. -->
</div>
</div>
<!--
This leaves for comparison

'''Condenser'''
* Neumann KMS 105
* Sennheiser e 965
* Rode S1
* Shure Beta 87a
* AKG C535
* Audix VX-5

'''Dynamic'''
* Sennheiser MD 435
* Sennheiser MD 445
* BeyerDynamic M88
* Shure Beta 58a
* Audix OM5

See the section at the end (Testing) for details about how I tested.
-->
== Conclusions ==
Any of these microphones will perform well with the {{L1 nl}}. Use the matching ToneMatch Preset and close microphone technique (lips brushing the windscreen). Note that all but one of these microphones have [[{{PAGENAME}}#Microphone_Polar_Pattterns|supercardioid or hypercardioid polar patterns]]. 

=== Application - High-Volume - Gain before Feedback ===
We are considering high-volume applications where gain before feedback is the priority
# Sennheiser MD 445 
# Sennheiser MD 435 
# Beyerdynamic M88
# Audix OM5
# Shure Beta 58a

The [[Sennheiser MD 445]] is my first choice. Sennheiser released this microphone in late 2020. It has an extremely tight supercardioid polar pattern. The [[Gain Before Feedback|gain before feedback]] sets it ahead of everything else on the list. It has a lift in the upper midrange and details in the highs that comes close to sounding like a good condenser microphone. This also helps me to project, compete, and be heard in a busy stage mix. [[Sennheiser MD 445|Read more]]

The Sennheiser MD 435 is perhaps the only microphone with a cardioid polar pattern I would happily use with an {{L1}}. Like its sibling (MD 445), the MD 435 has a vocal flattering EQ, and the off-axis rejection is very good for a cardioid microphone. The sound is excellent, with less emphasis in the upper midrange compared to the MD 445. For a female vocalist, I would consider this instead of the MD 445.

The Beyerdynamic M88 has been around since 1962. For decades it has been one of my go-to dynamic microphones. It has a slight edge for clarity over the Audix OM5 and is very close in feedback rejection. I would use either if I was working a small stage and could not get at least 4 feet away from the {{L1}}, or if having difficulty with reflections leading to feedback. If you can't get enough [[Gain Before Feedback|gain before feedback]], it doesn't matter how good the microphone sounds under better circumstances.

The Audix OM5 sounds good, has a tight hypercardioid polar pattern, and there is a ToneMatch Preset for it.

The Shure Beta 58a is a fine upgrade from a Shure SM 58 (cardioid polar pattern). However, the others on the list sound better to me.

=== Application - Soloist ===
# Neumann KMS 105
# Sennheiser e 965
# Audix VX-5
# AKG C535 
# Rode S1
# Shure Beta 87a

Where sound quality takes precedence over everything else, the Neumann KMS105 is first. It has very low handling noise, so as a handheld unit or on a stand it works well. I also found it to have the best resistance to wind noise and popping "p"s when "eating the mic." It has been my first choice for a microphone for my voice since 2004. It has also been great for female vocalists or any vocalists whose voice holds plenty of nuance. This microphone can be very present even at lower volumes. There is plenty of room for dynamics in the hands of a skilled artist while maintaining detail in softer passages.

There is a quality shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens, these microphones do that. I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of difference you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser, only more so. Think of the difference between red and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer. 

The Sennheiser e 965 was introduced in 2008 at close to the same price as the Neumann KMS 105 (above). In 2020, Sennheiser dropped the price as part of a 75th-anniversary promotion, and it is now an exceptional bargain. It is interesting because it has a switchable polar pattern (Supercardioid/Cardioid). This gives you the flexibility to use it with a vocalist who cannot consistently sing directly into the microphone. The others on this list are less forgiving. It also has a built-in -10 dB pad and a low-frequency roll-off for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").

I got the Audix VX-5 in 2018. It is an excellent microphone that took the number two spot on my list. Since then, the Sennheiser e 965 has bumped it down to number three.

The AKG C585, Rode S1, and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105 and Sennheiser e 965. 

The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 dB attenuation and low-frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the [[Proximity Effect|proximity effect]] that occurs with many directional microphones when you use the close-microphone technique ("eat the mic").
 
The Shure Beta 87a is at the bottom of the list because it was the most difficult to control for feedback of all of the condenser microphones. This would be a concern in a handheld situation.

<!--
=== Application - On the Stand ===
;Condenser
# Neumann KMS 105
# Sennheiser e 965
# Sennheiser MD 435
# Audix VX-5
# AKG C535 
# Rode S1
# Shure Beta 87a



The list remains the same. With good microphone technique the bottom three would be pretty much equivalent when mated up with ToneMatch Presets that seemed right for them. The differences will be more dependent on the singer's voice and range than anything I can detect in testing.
-->
== General Comments ==
A consequence of getting the Bose {{L1}} is that I can hear everything better.

This is a significant improvement at a qualitative level. This means that the quality of the sound (or lack of it) has become much more apparent to me. I am enjoying playing, and performing more than I have in years. 

Since getting my {{L1}} I am playing more, performing more, and singing more. 

In the days before the  {{L1}}  I practised vocals using the Sony C48 and the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, but since I couldn't hear myself anyway, there was no need to push the envelope (microphone quality) when performing live. I was singing harmony most of the time because I had not the confidence to take on lead vocals (couldn't hear myself). Now that I can get the same sound live as when practising, it is time to find a way to closely get the same sound in both circumstances. This was relatively easy to do with my guitar sound, and now I'm ready to do it with the vocals.

== What to do now ==
So for me, the Neumann KMS105 is a keeper for most of my gigs, but I could be very happy with the Sennheiser e 965. If I routinely played on louder stages, I'd want the Sennheiser MD 445.

<!--
The Rode S1 and the Shure Beta 87a are redundant, so I don't need to keep them.
-->
The Audix OM5 would be a great addition to anyone's gig bag and an expensive alternative to the Beyerdynamic M88.  For open stage events, I have several EV N/D767a microphones. Unfortunately, they've been discontinued. I prefer them to the Shure Beta 57s and Beta 58s. 

<!--
For instruments, I can use a couple of Neumann KM184s or AKG C451s. There is even a preset for the latter to be used with acoustic guitar. I think there's a notch at 200hz to alleviate boominess from the sound hole.
-->
=== As Time Goes By ===
In 2004 I wrote:
:I'm not an audiophile. I don't have a trained ear. I will never be hired for my vocal skills. The primary expression of my musical voice is my Guitar. Do I need to spend double the money on the Neumann vs. the Rode S1 (that I liked)? Probably not.

2021 Update:
:My musical path has changed and I am as much a vocalist as a guitarist. I attribute this to my time performing in front of my {{L1}}. Once I could hear myself clearly, I was able to develop my confidence and grow in this direction. I also believe that working with a great microphone (Neumann KMS 105) helped immensely. 

=== Why spend the money? ===
The difference is subtle. If I was still working through a conventional PA, much of the difference would be lost, imperceptible. I know from experience, I wouldn't be able to hear it in the monitors. But with the L1, I can hear the difference and it makes a difference. <!-- I used the Neumann last night at a gig. (Picked it up on the way there). I really enjoyed it. 

A couple of days ago I traded in a beautiful 8 year old PRS McCarty to get a PRS Brazilian series Custom 24. Interestingly, the new guitar has the "sparkle and shimmer" that the other one lacked. This is a subtle nuance that could easily be lost in a conventional guitar amp. The L1&trade;  seems to transparently make it louder. If you hear those kinds of differences in your instrument or voice, then you might make similar choices given the same options.
-->
== A Gentle Warning about the consequences ==
After you get your Bose system, you will probably go through some changes. 
Some, like parting with old gear that no longer seems appropriate are relatively easy. 
You will probably play and sing more. But you may find that you end up upgrading the input since the amplification of it (the source), is so faithful. That was unanticipated, and the heart of the warning.

<!--
In closing
I hope that all of this is useful to you, and that I have provided a little of the experience in a meaningful way. I will have all of these microphones in my possession for another couple of days. So if there is anything specific I can try for you, or if this raises questions... just ask.
-->


== Testing ==
=== Testing - How it was done ===
This is not all that interesting, but I thought you might want to know. 

First - a disclaimer: I have no formal background in testing methods or sound for that matter. I was going to try to be scientific about this, testing and measuring with a sound level meter and a real-time analyzer, but in the end, I just tried each microphone against its nearest competitors and listened. 

Physical surroundings: 20' x 40' room. The L1&trade;  was about a foot out from a fairly reflective wall facing into the long dimension of the room. The sides of the space are reflective too.

Settings: I had the L1&trade;  running so the trims were set to only flicker red slightly (then backed off a little). I used preset 02 for most of the testing, but experimented with others. I turned down the gains at the remotes so at any given time, only one microphone was "live". 

All the settings on the remote were set to 12:00 o'clock except for the master that was at 1-2 o'clock at times. It was loud! [edit - I took it up that high to find the threshold before feedback. I couldn't live with it that loud for long. The loudest I have ever taken the system running live is everything at 12:00 o'clock. I did some measurements today and this seems to hover at 100 db +- 5db. This is measured at ear level at 7 feet, same distance as the microphone ]

I tried the microphones several times set up at 7 feet from the L1&trade; , and then for the feedback stress test I put the microphones 3 from the L1&trade; . At 3 feet, I couldn't get the Shure Beta 87a to run higher than 12:00 for the master even when I was eating the mic. I could get the others a little higher. I had to turn things down below 12:00 o'clock if I wasn't standing between the microphone and the L1.

When listening for tone, clarity, and sound in general I turned the systems down to 12:00 o'clock on the master. The microphones were 7 feet from the L1&trade;  units for this part. I had four microphones going into separate channels (1 and 2) in two L1&trade;  units. I would sing the same phrases into each microphone and move them back and forth until I had them in an order I liked. Then to remove any "bias" inherent in the shape of the room or placement, I reversed the order (left-to-right) and listened again.

Not a trained singer, I can squeeze out a couple of octaves starting at the lowest note you can get from a guitar (E below middle C I think). I sang songs and scales, and just listened carefully. I had the microphones set up as you would playing live, so the L1&trade;  units were behind me. The microphones were angled upward about 60 - 70 degrees. (Looking from the left side in profile - about 2:30).


--- Go make music --- 

See what others had to say about this review [https://community.bose.com/t5/Portable-PA/Microphone-Review-Comparison/m-p/314292 on the Bose® Musicians' Site]


== Updates and thoughts ==
;July 2021

I can now add to the list of great microphones for the {{L1}} the Sennheiser e 965. It displaced the Audix VX-5 for number two spot, immediately below the Neumann KMS 105.

The Sennheiser e 965 is an extremely flattering vocal microphone, and it performs just like you would expect a high-quality condenser microphone to sound. It has two polar patterns (Supercardioid/Cardioid), a -10 dB pad, and a low-frequency roll-off. The pad can help with an extremely loud live stage. The roll-off can tame an excessive proximity effect (low-voice, aggressively eating the mic).

The Sennheiser MD 445 has the best performance for gain before feedback, beating everything else on this page, with a high-end clarity and presence close to the top condenser microphones. The Sennheiser MD 435 sounds just as good in a different way, and it is more forgiving for vocalists who stray away from the microphone. 

The Sennheisers MD 445 and MD 435 perform exceptionally well with the {{S1 Pro}}. They have displaced the [https://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=85 EV N/D767a] as my favourite microphone for that application.


;May 2019

Fifteen years later:

* I now sing lead vocals in most of my musical collaborations and enjoy that immensely. I attribute this directly to:
**  Being able to hear myself well through the Bose L1 systems over all this time
**  Having found '''my''' microphone
**  You can't fix what you can't hear. The {{L1}} systems let me hear better. 


I'm still using the [http://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=current_microphones&cid=kms105_description Neumann KMS 105]. It is my vocal microphone. 

I've used several other microphones that weren't available for the comparisons above.  Today I would include the [https://www.shure.com/en-US/products/microphones/ksm9 Shure KSM9] among the top contenders for a stage-worthy condenser microphone. Having used both it's not a matter of one being better than the other. They are outstanding microphones. It comes down to person preference and the combination of the singer and microphone. 

One more comment about the Neumann KMS 105. It makes singing effortless. Of all the microphones I've used over the years, it is the easiest to sing into to get the sound I want to hear. That's not something I can identify quantitatively with specifications, but it's real and it makes a huge difference. The Shure KSM9 is very close in this regard. 

Since the introduction of the {{Compact}} and {{S1}} I've had to consider dynamic microphones because these two units do not provide phantom power required for my Neumann KMS 105. Today I would add these microphones to the comparisons of dynamic microphones.
* [https://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=85 EV N/D767a] (discontinued, and my favourite dynamic microphone for use with the {{S1}})
* [https://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=2618 EV ND86]
* [https://en-us.sennheiser.com/vocal-microphone-dynamic-super-cardioid-e-945 Sennheiser E945]

== Reference Notes ==
=== Microphone Polar Pattterns===
{{Microphone Polar Pattern}}


== Recommended Reading ==
[https://www.dpamicrophones.com/mic-university/10-statements-on-condenser-microphones-vs-dynamic 10 Statements on Condenser Microphones vs Dynamic]

[https://www.neumann.com/homestudio/en/what-is-a-dynamic-microphone What is a Dynamic Microphone]

[https://www.neumann.com/homestudio/en/what-is-a-condenser-microphone What is a Condenser Microphone]

[https://www.neumann.com/homestudio/en/cardioid-omni-figure-8-why-do-microphones-have-different-pickup-patterns Why Do Microphones Have Different Pickup Patterns?]

[https://www.neumann.com/homestudio/en/what-is-the-proximity-effect What is the Proximity Effect]

----
[[Category:Editorial]]
[[category:Gear]]
[[category:Microphone]]
[[Category:Review]]
[[Category:Gear Review]]