Noisy NT2-a? Short comparison with C414B-ULS and U89 at DVinfo.net

Jesper Magnusson · October 13th, 2011, 02:09 AM

Have posted this on a few other forums, but haven't really gotten anywhere, so maybe someone here has more experience with these mics.

I recently bought a used NT2-a becouse I was interested in it's low self-noise for sound effects, VO and similar. When I got it I did a short test on speech recording it on it's own and simultaneously with a C414B-ULS and a U89 that I have access to in studio. The NT2-a sounds pretty good I think, but the self-noise was much higher in comparison. The NT2-a states a much lower self-noise spec than the others (though they too are very quiet) and is supposedly really good in that departement. I wonder it's faulty (it has a faint smell around it, not a good sign), so I hope you can help me shed some light on it. I tried looking for some other tests made on speech to compare, and all I could find was one by Ty Ford where he speaks 6'' away and unfortunately doesn't have much silence. I used that as a reference for levels (he also had a test on a U89 that I put in as well).

Here's a link to a zipfile with the clips, recorded in 48kHz and 24bit. The only processing is a bit of level balancing, to put everything at roughly the same level as the NT2-a test by Ty Ford (it's not exact, but should be good enough).
2shared - download NT2-A test, possibly faulty mic.zip

Test 1 is a short comparison between the different mics in a sound booth, all using a cardioid pattern and the speaker being about 8'' (20cm) away. The speaker (myself, so excuse the swedish and a little mouth-noise) is talking a bit softer than Ty Ford (I suspect he also processed his a little), so this should be taken into consideration.

Test 2 is the same setup with the NT2-a only, using both cardioid and figure eight, and then a closer take 3'' away in omni.

Test 3 I tried to match Ty Fords test more closely with only the NT2-a, about 6'' away, and speaking a bit louder. Figure eight and then cardioid.

I'm currently awaiting more information from the seller, before I can contact Rode. If you have any questions or want me to do something different with the files, just let me know!

Mvh
Jesper Magnusson

October 13th, 2011, 02:09 AM	#1
Jesper Magnusson Tourist Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Kalix, Sweden Posts: 1	Noisy NT2-a? Short comparison with C414B-ULS and U89 Have posted this on a few other forums, but haven't really gotten anywhere, so maybe someone here has more experience with these mics. I recently bought a used NT2-a becouse I was interested in it's low self-noise for sound effects, VO and similar. When I got it I did a short test on speech recording it on it's own and simultaneously with a C414B-ULS and a U89 that I have access to in studio. The NT2-a sounds pretty good I think, but the self-noise was much higher in comparison. The NT2-a states a much lower self-noise spec than the others (though they too are very quiet) and is supposedly really good in that departement. I wonder it's faulty (it has a faint smell around it, not a good sign), so I hope you can help me shed some light on it. I tried looking for some other tests made on speech to compare, and all I could find was one by Ty Ford where he speaks 6'' away and unfortunately doesn't have much silence. I used that as a reference for levels (he also had a test on a U89 that I put in as well). Here's a link to a zipfile with the clips, recorded in 48kHz and 24bit. The only processing is a bit of level balancing, to put everything at roughly the same level as the NT2-a test by Ty Ford (it's not exact, but should be good enough). 2shared - download NT2-A test, possibly faulty mic.zip Test 1 is a short comparison between the different mics in a sound booth, all using a cardioid pattern and the speaker being about 8'' (20cm) away. The speaker (myself, so excuse the swedish and a little mouth-noise) is talking a bit softer than Ty Ford (I suspect he also processed his a little), so this should be taken into consideration. Test 2 is the same setup with the NT2-a only, using both cardioid and figure eight, and then a closer take 3'' away in omni. Test 3 I tried to match Ty Fords test more closely with only the NT2-a, about 6'' away, and speaking a bit louder. Figure eight and then cardioid. I'm currently awaiting more information from the seller, before I can contact Rode. If you have any questions or want me to do something different with the files, just let me know! Mvh Jesper Magnusson