I’m specifically asking this with home recording users in mind. so for some, 3 may be too many to list and thats ok. Any pros and semi-pros are welcome to chime in also. The number 3 was just thrown out there to keep folks from sending some crazy long list. 
1 Like
The entire Lewitt line and a Royer 121.
1 Like
A 121 for vocals? Seems like it’s such a standard for micing amps, I hadn’t really heard of it used for vocals. Wish I had one to test drive!
Oops. I guess I was having some trouble reading the question. Let me revise that.
My favorite vocal mic is the one that my Artist sounds best on. That said, I haven’t found anyone who doesn’t sound great on the Lewitt LCT 940. That entire line is stupid good, but that’s their top condenser mic, which has a variable FET and Tube setting.
The only other mic that I’ve ever found that seems to sound great on everyone is the Telefunken ELAM 251, which are vintage and prohibitively expensive. Enjoy, @Mixerman
1 Like
Eric @Mixerman… I have NEVER tried one! That’s one mic I’ve never played with. I’d love to give one a try sometime. You’re still in Asheville…right? Do you know of a studio in the Carolinas that has one?
My buddy Michael Selverne who is a producer here in Asheville keeps his at Echo Mountain studios. Come on out! Enjoy, @Mixerman
Very nice! Will do. I’d be really excited to see some of George Augpurger design work too. Love the setup 
Everyone is welcome to chime in! Even if you only have 1 vocal mic you like to use, just let us know
I’d take #2 mainly because of the resale value of the Neumann. I’d sell the U47 and get a decent preamp, interface, monitors and a half decent low end mic. Before doing that I would rent some good gear to compare a low to mid range mic with the Neumann…If the Neumann was really impressive I would scrap my original plan and keep that sucker.
1 Like
Right. Some may not even use 3. I have gravitated to the AT 4040 because that’s what I have and that’s what works. I have others that I use from time to time, but only that one “top” as far as I’m concerned. It’s also the one that is always set up and ready to go, so that has a certain impact on my choices. 
3 Likes
I’ve been using my AT4040 for the last year or so for the same reasons as you. It’s stored in a convenient location and it’s a reputable mic. I have a bunch of other condensers but they’re all tucked away, so I just grab the readily available AT4040.
As far as sound quality goes I can’t hear any appreciable differences in any of my large diaphragm condenser mics. They range from about $90 to $400 but they sound basically the same. Back around 2010 I did a mic shootout using an acoustic guitar…I compared 10 different large diaphragm condensers…The conclusion I came to was that all the mics were so extremely similar in sound reproduction that it was no use favouring one over another. The only subtle differences were in their output levels. I also tried a vocal shootout with 6 or 7 large diaphragm condensers, and I came to the same conclusion…
Except for this …
I once rented an AT4047 and that mic definitely sounded different. It sounded full, thick and beefy compared to the other 15 or so cheaper condensers I owned at the time. I used it for vocals…It almost sounded too thick, but now when I listen to those recordings I really like how full my voice sounds compared to the thinness of the other mics I own/ owned.
1 Like
That’s my feeling too. I have a higher end tube mic that sounds okay, but not necessarily better. I also have an M-Audio Nova which does just about as well as the AT 4040. While I wouldn’t necessarily say “a mic is a mic is a mic”, the differences could be quite subtle in the ultimate analysis. A lot is down to EQ IMO, as when I used the IK Multimedia MicRoom plugin, they basically just EQ’d the tone of traditional/classic mics. Nothing magical, just EQ shift. Much of the workflow of certain mics is just their EQ pattern as (somewhat) shown by frequency response charts.
I have heard good things about the big brothers/sisters of the AT 4040, which might incline me to invest in them at some point. Based on my experience with the AT 4040. Kind of the viewpoint that “more is more”, rather than more is less. With other mics, I can read reviews, but I don’t have the same experience, other than some limited commercial studio experiences with those other brands.
1 Like
Sound brilliant. I think I’d do the same.
Dude. So have I…its an outstanding mic imo!
Agree with you here. I did notice a little difference…some are brighter. But I think I would group them as brighter and darker. With the 4040 being on the dark side and the Rode NT1 being on the brighter side. Other than that, my experience was similar.
1 Like
I have a very low budget setup, and I started out using a Creative Labs mic that was basically a headset mic without the headphones. It was almost as bad as my singing!
But then I bought an ATR30 and went way upscale! I always felt it was a solid mic for a $100 thereabouts. Then I thought it broke so I bought a Shure SM58, hoping that would be a minor upgrade. Then I figured out that my ATR30 was fine, only the cable was bad. So since then I have always recorded vocals on both in mono. My theory was I would get a richer, fuller tone that way possibly. Is this a good idea? I can’t say, but the two do sound slightly different. I used to pan them left and right and had some cheesy stereo effect going on, but lately I am panning them both to center and basically mixing them.
I’m pretty sure no mic is going to make my voice or singing sound much better, but I am certain that most cheaper mics would make me sound noticeably worse.
I used to run the mics through a Behringer 12-track mixer, but lately I’m just plugging in directly to my Scarlet 2i2, and that seems to be cleaner, and I’m not recording two things at once anyway. I need to keep things fairly static and predictable, maybe make small incremental adjustments over time.
always love these threads, so many different experiences that lead to specific choices.
My top three are:
Stage - Neumann KMS105. I have been using these since they came out and always get consistent results no matter the singer. The integral triple pop filter works very well and they can handle a ton of SPLs.
I should note that the majority of the live work I do is with sound companies providing vocal mics based off of artists riders, which almost all are SM58s. Some singers bring in their own mics so I see Heil’s, Sennheiser’s, and Beta series Shure’s to as well as my beloved Neumanns.
Studio - RE20 with Mojave MA200. This combo is my go to vocal chain in the studio. Usually the RE20 sits directly in front of the singer with the MA200 upside down above it. One of the two always has an edge but it isn’t always the same one. Some times the MA200, sometimes the RE20. I don’t do a whole lot of studio work these days but when I do that is the setup.
2 Likes
Shure KSM-27
Shure SM27
MXL 910
Honorable mention:
Rode NT1A
Kel HM-1
My KSM-27 (lg diaphragm condenser) cost me around $400 10 years ago. Last year I decided I should have a 2nd one, but when I went to order it I learned they are no longer made. The SM27 ($270) is nearly identical. A bit hotter, maybe a tiny bit “darker”. I use these for vocals almost exclusively. My only complaint is that the shock mount (same on both) is very poorly constructed, I literally have to keep a screwdriver on hand to adjust it
The MXL910 is a very decent-sounding large diaphragm condenser for ony $170 (plus $25 for a decent shock mount). It’s next in line after the 2 Shure’s, in case I have occasion to use more than 2 mics and once.
The Rode NT1A (about $200) has great clarity, and produces a much hotter signal compared to my other mics. Plus it comes with a really nice shock mount. Definitely the coolest-looking mic in my arsenal, if looks matter to anyone. But I found it rather “unforgiving”, as it picked up and amplified all kinds of sounds that were inaudible in the room (birds outside, a plane high overhead, a dog barking a block away). I guess in many circumstances that would be a GOOD thing, but for my purposes it turned out to be more trouble than it was worth, so I rarely use it anymore.
I don’t use the Kel HM-1 that much anymore, as I just like the Shures that much better, but it’s a very impressive performer for less than $100 (I think I got it on sale for $50 or $60). When my studio was just getting started, and money was really tight, Brandon Drury recommended it as a decent low-cost vocal mic. I recorded vocals for a couple albums with it. It’s actually a small-diaphragm side-address condenser. No shock mount, comes with a thick black foam windscreen. It has a very flat frequency response, overall a bit “darker” sounding than the other mics. Once in a blue moon I still use it if I have a singer with i thin squeaky voice.
That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.
1 Like
I still haven’t tried one of those KSM27’s. How well does it work on acoustic guitars? Just curious
I know some people have used it on acoustic guitar. I tried it a couple times, but didn’t like it as well as the pair of small diaphragm condensers I usually use. I think I could’ve gotten good results if I’d experimented more with placement, and especially if I could have tried 2 of them at once. Now that I have the SM27 as well, I may try micing an acoustic with the pair sometime.
I almost always record acoustic guitar in stereo. Most often I use a pair of Superlux S241s, one at the 12th fret, the other just behind the bridge, both angled in toward the soundhole.
I went with Shure to try vocal mics and compare…I almost chose Sennheiser for no other reason than trying to reduce confusion of a billion mics.
so Shure… SM57…58. sm7b…KSM27, 32, 44…(the ribbon was waaaaay out of my price range)
Sm7b was for the noisy room and I was lazy.
After getting a room a little quieter…LDC…KSM27…then after pondering the raves about the 44 then a 44 and 27…
they were extremely similar but the 27 had plosives, until adding the foam cap as SOS article mentioned.
I liked the 44 maybe a little better but then it was invisible difference once the compressor and drum tracks were going. MiXOnline dude even mentioned his standard is U87 and the 27 maybe more like it in the hi-end.
There is a difference in build but I ended up keeping the KSM27 after buying and selling and buying back the 44 then sold it…KSM27 was considerably cheaper in the poverty section of the room and sounded really as good imo.
KSM27 is built a bit tougher in the metal grill making it intentionally designed to go from studio to stage (Dixie chics…etc…)… its cardiod only and the capsule is similar to the 44 but not a dual diagphram (where the plosives come from ) the dual has a “blocker” on the back right? so the plosive and air is lessened as Shure has mentioned.
I got this KSM27 for like $80…it was so pro built I bought another in a meth excitement moment…but I only need one vocal mic these days. I do like 2 half finshed recordings a year, so take anything with a grain of salt.
the KSM27 is only 14mv/pa sensitivity vs 28 for the U87 and KSM44…so its also a nice Home Studio mic… though its way more senstive than the SM7b which is kind of King in that world…I dont see that ever changing.
Im trying to rent a U87 for $170 month just to hear one here, store some tracks etc… isnt it kind of the King of HR LDC? maybe only second to the AKG 414 which is a lot cheaper.
it boggles my mind how name and models become so huge? is it real or just a popularity thing? I mean even AKG puts out hundreds of other mics but the 414 is still the one, or the cv12 no one can afford…
shure makes a lot of mics…but do they get tired of customers just asking for SM57 or a 58 and SM7b over and over?
The KSM27 was kind of written off because the 44 didnt have the plosives pop…right? but with the foam its like another mic.
My answer then is Top 3:
SM58 (will swap out with the SM7b again in the future)
KSM27
Todays new visitor AKG C2000B (which has the closest spec chart to U87 over any other mic spec chart… I could find)…if you know of others Im curious to hear it…
1 Like