oh i gotta check this with the cans... how far off the mic were you?

so far, sounds pretty good-- but it's SO hard to tell from dook plastoid compu-speaks!

Reasonably close. I forgot to bring a pop filter home so I taped a chopstick (for want of a pencil) to the rather prodigious shockmount. It's roughly twice the size of the plain universal mount my Shure is in, and I was a bit back from that; probably a little less than a foot, back farther on the louder notes. So roughly up on where a pop filter would be. The acoustic was in pretty close around where the neck meets the body, maybe six inches back. Hardly a scientific test or ideal, but it's something to start with.

I like how it captures the body of the acoustic without being muddy. As a vocal mic, I don't think I'd go nuts EQing this. It seems lacking in murkiness with just the right amount of shiny up top.

Yeah that's why I thought it'd be a great room mic, the way it picked up the body of the acoustic and made it sound like a nice acoustic in a nice room.

It's a reasonably decent acoustic- a cheapie Ibanez, but it sounds kickass, even with the fairly dead strings on there. The room, though, is nice. It's just my living room, but it's a big empty oddly shaped hardwood thing.

Speaking of which, here's a clip with the NTK and Rode NT5 SDC. NTK at the bridge, NT5 at the 12th fret, both around... maybe 8 inches back. The first part is the NTK on its own, the second the NT5 on its own, and the end is both together.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/13184331/NTK_NT5_acoustic_test.mp3

Wow, that last bit sounded fantastic on my laptop speakers which generally make everything sound like shit.

Definitely gotta here this with some phones.

That latest clip sounds super nice. Awesome playing too on that one.

Thanks guys. The NT5s are sort of a not-so-secret weapon. They're a really nice little mic you could probably find a good deal on a matched pair of with a hard case with a little looking around. That sound is all just placement; all you need is a big condenser and a little condenser. I aim the larger of the two at the bridge as I find micing the soundhole too boomy, and the small mic at the 12th fret adds some sparkle. That technique sounds to me like it captures an acoustic pretty naturally with little or no need for manipulation- I didn't even move the faders here, just set the gain on both preamps roughly the same and recorded it. But it also gives you some room to work with if you need to fit something into a track without doing horrible things to it with EQ.

By way of contrast, something similar with the Shure KSM27 in place of the NTK at the bridge, and- thank you Curtis for this idea- the NTK in between the two about six feet back in the room (roughly measured by my laying on the floor).

First the KSM, then the NT5, then the NTK, then all three together. The KSM isn't as hot as either of the Rodes, so I'm getting a bit more juice from the preamp.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/13184331/KSM_NT5_NTK_acoustic_test.mp3

holy cow. that sounds really nice! i'm actually partial to JUST the bridge alone-- the nt5's are a little too cutty.. but the top end of the NTK is really.. shazam.

THAT was a supa-score! sheesh!

Funny, I sent this to my occasional collaborator in studio matters and he said something similar. That being said, if I needed to stuff the acoustic into a dense track I think I'd probably rather bring up a fader with an NT5 on it than boost the top end with an EQ?

The clean one did sound great but I thought it needed some compression once you started to belt it... listening to the treated version now... this is seckz!

Great sounding mic.

aw hell-- you OUGHT to trust your instincts, 'cause your ears for recording do JUST fine ... i was just impression-izing, anyhow- and since that lil mix was only JUST geetar.. the extry fatness sounded nice.

all told-- sounds loverly either way, and that thing sounds like the kinda sonic toy i'd love to have lying around!

The extra girth on the acoustic is really important in a sparser mix. There's no steady-state sort of signals like a distorted guitar or a synth it needs to be heard over, so it can retain its proper proportion of body. I'm looking forward to trying it out on a cab to see how it compares against the usual suspects. I'll probably have to borrow my ribbon back for that though. (There's a combination that probably sounds really gigantic!)

I like the sound of that KSM.

Also, the all-combined on both clips is proper swell.

DOH.. there's an NTK locally for $350, and it's of the first run way back in the 90's... shit!

yargh.. i don't have right now, and no projects to pay for it! rats.

That is teh suck. They are nice mics. Thankfully they're fairly common. From what I gather, the early run (mine appears to be older as well by the condition of the original box- it's rather faded) came with a significantly superior tube, which seems to be the key with these- the tube matters.

I just did a vocal recording yesterday which is hanging out in the Your Recordings forum, and it holds its own with no EQ whatsoever. Just some compression and it's there.

And speaking of which, I used my ART DMPA on that; I have a Raytheon 12AU7 I should pop in one of the channels in place of the Mullard 12AT7s I have in there now to see what happens.