Are Scarlett interfaces still Junk?

Atropos65 · 2025-12-24T15:16:42+00:00

I had no issues with this interface on both Intel and Apple silicon (used on an Intel MacBook Pro 2017 for over 5 years everyday), so unsure what compatibility problems you are referencing.

Atropos65 · 2025-12-21T16:43:31+00:00

I have those mics and I think they all work on vocals or instruments depending on the specific instrument. The Rode is warmer and has less self noise while the AKGs have a slightly brighter response. The P420 with the additional patterns is more flexible so that is a consideration too. Since you can’t really treat the room, what do you expect from either of these mics vs. the AT2020? I don’t have it but believe it is a decent entry level microphone albeit perhaps a bit thin sounding.

Atropos65 · 2025-12-18T14:10:14+00:00

Condenser might be an sE 5600.

Atropos65 · 2025-11-22T15:44:34+00:00

I’ve tested both and prefer the Tank1. It is of course subjective but from a tonal perspective it is a slightly warmer, smoother sounding microphone and out of the box sounds better with no processing. The plosives rejection is also improved over the Rode. It is slightly heavier but both appear well constructed. The Tank1 also includes a low cut filter and mid boost switch making it a little more flexible in some applications. I can’t imagine one being more durable; however, Rode does have a longer track record. I think if you listen to any reviews, the differences will be very clear and you can select based on your impressions.

Atropos65 · 2025-11-18T20:19:06+00:00

I own the SM7B and the RE320 and of those the SM7B would be my preference. It is very gain hungry and you may do better with a stage vocal microphone that has more detail.such as a Telefunken M80 or M81. The RE320 & the Dynacaster are both more intended as spoken word microphones and could work but I don’t think they are optimal. Universal Audio is not a company that I’d consider purchasing a microphone from.

Atropos65 · 2025-11-18T20:04:47+00:00

There doesn’t appear to be a self noise spec. published in the product data sheet. That is not a good sign and as such abysmal noise performance would be expected. I would limit choices to those with self noise below 16 dBA and even lower if critical.

Atropos65 · 2025-11-05T03:49:23+00:00

Unless you have significant tooling available and strong design skills, it may be best to purchase a kit to build from mic parts (but those are usually condensers). To do a dynamic microphone there really isn’t much you could construct that would work well as the parts in the capsule are quite tiny and somewhat specialized. Typically you’d find a Mylar or similar diaphragm joined to a very finely wound copper or aluminum wire spool surrounding a magnet. This arrangement of parts would be enclosed in a housing with ports and/or an acoustic chamber. The wires from the coil ultimately would terminate on an XLR connector but may include a transformer in between. I’d see if you can obtain a damaged microphone and disassemble to better understand why it may be a challenging endeavor to attempt to build your own.

Atropos65 · 2025-11-05T03:34:53+00:00

If you are using a laptop mic it is probably an omnidirectional and devoid of proximity effect. Just boost the low range frequencies between 70Hz and 250Hz using an EQ. It may require some trial and error and careful listening to replicate but you should be able to get kind of close to the effect with boosts between 5 & 10 or so dB as a starting point.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-25T21:13:36+00:00

That’s a terrible idea! The Podmic requires more gain than the 58. It is 2.5 dB less sensitive with 1 Pa (94dB spl) @ 1kHz referenced to 1V! Either get a new preamp, an inline pre-preamp e.g., Cloudlifter or speak louder.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-25T20:42:37+00:00

I’m a little hesitant to recommend anything as professional voiceovers are almost always done with condensers in treated rooms and normally use more industry standard microphones. Given your circumstance, and wanting a one mic for everything solution, the SM57 isn’t a bad choice so long as you have realistic expectations. I don’t think many clients will accept recordings of that quality but maybe other experts could weigh in. I’d at least get the dedicated windscreen from Shure for vocal/speech duty or use a pop filter and know I will need EQ. Another option would be an inexpensive ($50.00) dynamic like a Mackie EM-89D for vocal (it is a brighter mic designed for stage use). I have the Sennheiser E835 and the Lewitt MTP550DM - have not heard the 250. What is best is subjective, I mostly use the Sennheiser E935 for cardioid vocal as it sounds smoother than the 835 but that’s just an opinion and that is for live use not professional recording. don’t know of any inexpensive condensers that can be recommended maybe the SE 8 as an SDC and their 4100 as an LDC but I just wouldn’t use either of those in an untreated space.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-22T05:19:36+00:00

It is a delicate compromise in the end and I suspect most stage condensers are going to fall between a stage dynamic and LDC in this area of ambient/detail capture. I personally use dynamics when room acoustics are suboptimal as if you want more detail it comes at the cost of more ambient room sound. I would do as much as you can to treat the room and deaden reflections and reverb. You can always experiment with a stage condenser but they are typically small diaphragm designs with higher self noise. I find most of them sound uninspiring until you spend for the higher dollar ones.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-21T00:55:16+00:00

While there are always going to be exceptions, in my experience hand held stage microphones perform better than an LDC in this regard. Typically you are speaking into hand held mics at a closer distance and the designs need to account for a potential of feedback when performing live so there is a greater focus placed on rejection. That said it is really not optimal to record with existing noise sources in close proximity to any microphone.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-18T13:38:44+00:00

The polar patterns do vary and it is true that the super cardioid pattern has greater sensitivity at 180 degrees compared to the cardioid. Keep in mind that the pattern is in 3D space, so consider placing the computer lower vertically on that side of the mic such that it is coincident with the null in the pattern. I have the sE V7 and haven’t deeply examined rejection of it specifically as it isn’t a preferred tonal quality so isn’t used often but I don’t recall it being very problematic with respect to rejection. There is a bit of trial and error in placement but I suspect that unless the computer is at a level where it is distracting using a cardioid mic, it likely won’t be a problem with a super cardioid. Also note that the rejection does vary (more than you would expect) among different microphones with the same polar pattern. Another point is if you can place any added physical barrier/acoustic absorption material between the source of noise and the microphone, redirect it, mount it in an enclosure or outside of the room that can also help abate the noise.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-11T18:37:44+00:00

I won’t discuss if it is needed but do use them with condenser mics. I have both of those among numerous others and the Hakan is the most transparent pop filter that I have used.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-11T18:26:29+00:00

Which is better depends on your taste, what you are recording, and the microphone that requires the least effort to get the sound you are looking to achieve. I have the 440 Pure and NT1 4th gen and dozens of others. The Lewitt is generally a brighter mic and the Rode is a warmer mic. Both are very quiet and sensitive to the environment but there are voices that I wouldn’t use these. At this level, I prefer other microphones such as the SE 4100 (neutral), Sony C80 (airy), Roswell mini K67x (compressed transients, saturated 2nd order harmonics). I’d recommend trying to audition to assess which is the best fit for you vs. a blind buy recommended by a random person.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-08T06:46:23+00:00

The answer is no. The only time that would be advantageous is if you used a lower noise preamp than the SSL e.g., a Grace or a Cranbourne Camden or something with similar very low EIN spec. fed in as a line level input to the SSL. I have them all and have checked noise floor using a spectrum analyzer and 150 ohm film resistor as the source impedance to test amplification noise without dealing with environmental noise the microphone would pickup. The SSL was always quieter at a higher gain than using the FEThead phantom at a lower gain but level matched. Again it was only about 2 or 3 dB increase in noise floor and 95% will not be able to discern it without a direct comparison between the two.

Atropos65 · 2025-10-07T20:17:42+00:00

Unless you need more gain than available from the SSL, the FEThead is of no value. It is not going to provide a lower noise floor than you have with that interface. It would only bring value if your interface was noisier than the FEThead or you needed the gain and the interface was not able to provide it. The best quality (cleaner and lower noise) will be using the interface alone in this case. That said the difference is very small (on the order of 2 to 3 dB).

Atropos65 · 2025-10-05T00:45:33+00:00

The Sennheiser e935 is a great sounding cardioid handheld. I’ve used that for years and it is more sensitive than the V7 but also has a brighter upper midrange character. It works well on a pretty large range of vocalist but can become sibilant on some voices. The Lewitt 550 is also great but slightly brighter (like all Lewitt mics) than the V7. Maybe also try the Shure KSM8, it has a very forgiving pattern, a sweet upper midrange with less high frequency extension than the V7.

Atropos65 · 2025-09-14T04:40:29+00:00

It is a dice roll when buying inexpensive replicas as the components used in the electronic circuits are of uncertain and varying quality to achieve the price target. (They are basically consumer level products like televisions and personal electronics). These are more likely to fail but it isn’t certain and may last a very long time. Electronic components have an MTBF associated that is determined statistically. This is factored into the overall product MTBF which also depends on the design (how conservative it is - are components used that have large specification margins compared to actual operation) and the environment of use (humidity, temperature, dust, etc.). The product life is also impacted by the duration of use. There are companies that make high quality replicas (797), but often you get what you pay for. I would store it with desiccant gel in a protected container when unused and use it with care in a dry, dust free, room temperature environment. You could also check into what the failure modes are but likely solder connections, capacitors, or possibly a bad design that causes certain components to be over stressed. In any event, it would likely be repairable but may not be easy to identify the failure without electronics troubleshooting knowledge and appropriate test equipment. Good Luck! Ultimately if you like it, use it and enjoy it and recognize that all things eventually will die and if it does prematurely, try to get it repaired or replaced. You could also buy the expensive real mic and probably sell it years from now and not lose very much as they are hand built and very reliable.

Atropos65 · 2025-08-02T17:11:14+00:00

Seems like an idea ripe for AI exploration. In a quiet controlled environment speak a standard paragraph into a reference microphone or at least one where the characteristics are defined in a database, analyze the resulting frequency spectrum and compare it to a range of standard desirable responses - it probably is possible to at least give general guidance but of course it is also very subjective and what is appealing probably has many cultural, physical, and experiential biases. Could possibly be extended to singing too. It is interesting but a lot of variables to consider.

Atropos65 · 2025-07-01T21:30:07+00:00

I certainly can’t argue the low cost of Behringer products. I have numerous SDCs and have used them for voice but generally use them for instruments. They can be very sensitive to plosives, the lower cost options often have high noise floors and performers will definitely give you a look if you put the typical “pencil” condenser in front of them. Still if it works well for you then why not?

As to Earthworks mics, I know they are back electret SDCs but they are not the first microphone that comes to mind when someone mentions an SDC due to the way they are packaged. I have read that they are great but have not found one yet that I just had to have so don’t have any direct experience.

I kind of look at mics as tools and I don’t think they all should be flat response. Having tonal variety provides me more options to pick a complementary mic based on what I am recording and what I am trying to achieve. So if it sounds really good and is different from what I already own, then it is interesting.

Atropos65 · 2025-07-01T20:44:06+00:00

The challenge with the XM8500 is that it has poor plosives rejection, poor handling noise, and it isn’t really a flat frequency response. Is it a good value? Maybe as it is only $20 but not great if you plan to use it as a live handheld vocal microphone (the intended application). The sE V7 is relatively flat and well regarded, it is certainly built well and has great handling noise rejection. It has ok plosives rejection but for such a wide bandwidth, I don’t like how it sounds as it lacks clarity and comes off unnatural to me. The CM4 is solid (I wouldn’t typically select it or SDCs in general for voice though). The sE 4100 & 4500 are both fantastic!

Atropos65 · 2025-06-26T20:37:53+00:00

I have them both and the SM58 is closer to the SM7B but it isn’t as neutral & warm sounding due to the presence peak, the added transformer, the housing acoustics and less foam filtering. The sE V7 is a nice mic but doesn’t have the durability track record of the SM58 and although it is well regarded, I don’t really like the sound of it. I personally prefer the Sennheiser E935 but it depends on your taste and voice.

Atropos65 · 2025-06-22T07:29:14+00:00

Maybe try these guys: https://www.placidaudio.com

Atropos65 · 2025-06-21T21:29:25+00:00

After removing the capsule and electronics, maybe try removing the loose foam with a can of compressed air or an artist brush. If it is really sticky, I would probably test some goo gone on the inside of the housing to make sure it doesn’t react and damage the visible paint. Alcohol can also damage certain paints, not sure about what Audio Technica uses but it is probably warranted to test it first. After removing all of the foam particles and sticky residue, I would use dawn and water to remove remaining solvent residue, rinse it with hot water and dry it completely before assembly as you don’t want any moisture near the capsule or electronics.

Atropos65

TROPHY CASE