All user reviews for the Behringer C-3

The Behringer C-3 is a large dual diaphragm condenser mic that has a cardioids, omni and figure 8 pickup patterns. On paper the Behringer C-3 looks great because it cost less than 100 dollars and comes with those pickup patterns. But that is not the case, this microphone is very noisy. It is so noisy it pretty much makes it unusable. I do not even recommend this microphone to someone who is on a small budget and is a beginner. You can get a better microphone for cheaper than this one is.

OVERALL OPINION

Behringer claims that the Behringer C-3 can be used for instruments (acoustic) but there is just no way that it could work for me because the recordings are not warm enough and the microphone has a constant noise to it. it is built well and has a rugged body to it. I don’t even see this microphone breaking down or going out over time even if it is dropped a few times.
The value for the price that It cost is decent, because it only cost about 65 dollars. But still at that price you can get a better sounding and quieter USB microphone from Blue Microphones or even another brand that will give you a better and warmer sound than this condenser will from Behringer. I have had a lot of problems with Behringer mics over the years and I think it is because they are focused on manufacturing microphones that are cheaper and more affordable rather than putting out microphones that have a great sound and quality to them. The quality of sound is below average for microphones in this price range which I do not understand because if you look at the specs of the microphone you would expect it to sound a lot better and be really quiet like Behringer claims that it is.

The C3 from Behringer was an up and down mic for me. At first I was happy with it, it has some issues with losing a lot of frequencies from time to time. The crazy thing is that sometimes when I was using it , it would work fine and sound great, but then other times after recording with it then going back to mix the song before it gets mastered and you look at the eq wave forms from what you just recorded with the c3 some of the top end or high’s will be really weak and thin and the mids and lows will be thick and stong. Which means that I had to do some boosting on the higher frequencies which can really get sloppy if its not done right so I had to have someone else to it so I didn’t mess it all up because for some reason I couldn’t get it clean. But this is just too much of a hassle and for the mic to be unreliable, every time I used it I was wondering if it was going to cause this issue again, that is something that I don’t want to be worried with down the road. I want to record and be good to start mixing it down easy before It gets mastered.


OVERALL OPINION

The C3 is actually a failure compaired to the sound of the version that was out before this one, that is very disappointing because I have used the c-1 and I loved it many years ago. So when I was thinking of getting the C3 I got it at a discount so I thought it was a steal but when it was all done I ended up taking the mic back for its inconsistency. I had a lot of problems with e frequencies on this mic, I wouldn’t purchase it again.

Because I own a couple of Behringer B-5 microphones that perform really well, I bought the Behringer C-3. The B-5's have a very low self noise. But unfortunately the C-3 is very noisy! I took a look inside and discovered that they use a cheap TL072 as head amplifier. No surprise that you get noise at this low level... As far as I could see the capsules look the same as the capsules used in the B-5. The pattarn switching is done by a CD4066.
I think I will remove the PCB completely and replace it with a new designed head amplifier. The microphone was rather cheap and the capsules are probably very good. So: a good object for some DIY!

OVERALL OPINION

The capsules seem to be of good quality, but the design of the head amplifier is poor.

This is a studio condenser microphone static.
I use it for singing, and I must say he made a great sound.

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for about a month.
This is my deuxime micro, but the first is a dynamic that can not compare them.
The report qualitprix is ​​excellent (as always with Behringer).
With exprience, I certainly would do that choice.
It is not always useful to have standards dpenser of money to brand the hardware when you can get a comparable rsultat with hardware good price and excellent quality!

Edit 2010: The view changes with exprience ... Good mic for beginners, but there are better for the same price in Toto.

What kind of microphone? (Song, sound, mixed ..) one can see everything I think on the C-1
What technology? (Electret, condenser ...) condansatuer

OVERALL OPINION

How long have you use it?

a week to tinker with (considering the price)

What is so special that you like most and least?
few months to gain momentum and that the C-1 with a bandwidth limit and no proper Garve, after amendment limits it starts to get interesting and are a lot of missing dynamics, electronics is much more complex than the C- 1, capacitors directly attacks a TL072 FET-input class AB
but we do not learn much just the sensors.

Have you tried many other models before buying it?
yes, a little luxury every model found in the large studio
How would you rate the quality / price? you for the price. no more!
With experience, you do again this choice? ... Yes to tinker!

Capacitor condenser microphone, directivity slecteur (cardioid, omnidirectional or figure-eight), low-cut filter, 10dB Attnuateur for making sound pressure of acoustic instruments (drums, ...) . I test on the song, but it seems to be quite versatile. Attachment included and all delivered in a pretty packaging.

OVERALL OPINION

I am owner of the M-Audio Nova, which is in the same price range, and I rcemment reu this microphone. So I have done comparison tests and it appears that the C-3 is really bad! The voices sound mtalliques, they are not Submitted, there is saturation. The directivity slecteur only gadget. The low-cut filter is an option because the use popping out much. The rest is nothing, and the sound is ugly.

For the same price range, the 100x prfrez M-Audio Nova! The only advantage of C-3 is its packaging is better bill than M-Audio, and setting that takes over the road. But the sound is not DEFINITIONS! You can do better in the same price.

*Microphones are very subjective. Some microphones that work for some brilliantly may be disastrous on others. It is therefore important to understand the context in which this review is written and take it with a grain of salt, like all reviews on microphones should be treated.*

The Behringer C-3 is a dual diaphragm multi pattern condenser microphone that is aimed at the extreme budget market. Being a multi pattern microphone, it is a bit less sensitive than its sibling, the Behringer C-1; it even, according to Behringer, loses 2,000 Hz of response off of the top end! The frequency response of the C-1 is 40-20,000 Hz, while the response of the C-3 is 40-18,000 Hz. It has a rather disgusting noise level of 23 dB; this puts it at a higher level than most tube microphones!

Of course, the hook of the C-3 is that it is supposed to be multi pattern. It features the three standard patterns that one would expect on a multi pattern microphone (cardioid, figure 8, omnidirectional), but sometimes, I feel as if the cost of becoming multi pattern has crippled the already wounded Behringer C-1 into the C-3.

Heck, I could actually use the C-1 if I absolutely had to, but the sound of the C-3 is dismal. It sounds narrow, and somehow harsh and yet muffled all at once.

OVERALL OPINION

I reviewed the Behringer C-1 as well and said that it would be find if it was all you wanted, but of course, I didn't recommend the microphone at all. That's because these extremely cheap C-series microphones have this uncanny ability to sound harsh and yet muffled at the same time. I said that they seem to pick up less detail that dynamic microphones? Well, that's because they do! I'm a lover of dynamic microphones myself, but when they capture transients better than certain condensers, that's the cue to leave certain condensers alone. That said, however, considering the features that Behringer packs into the C-3 for so little, you can't really go wrong if you're not aiming terribly high with sound quality.

However, if you're so desperate for a microphone in this price range, get a C-1 or go to the Behringer dynamic, the XM8500. You simply are not going to get a good multi pattern microphone in this price range.

for that price, who could ask for more??
Static large diaphragm multidirectional 3 positions:
cardio (but limited bandwidth and dynamic)
8 (a better balance)
and ubiquitous (slightly noisy)



OVERALL OPINION

always used paired stereo plugs for acoustic guitars,
violins, flutes, harmonica, percussion and sounds from everyday objects
Bass guitar and amp, brass, voice, etc. ...
focusriteDSP24 firewire directly into pro and Daw
(Picture musical documentaries for television and models).

I do not usually take time to give advice,
but some notice published on the site have determined my choice of purchase;
also had regard to the fact that I know this material
and it allowed me to gain a little .... my life with I owed him that right!

Did you try many other models before getting this one?
no, because I will not have to buy them, rather not get sick!
but I will like to try ... without having to promise an order
and having to pay an advance purchase in store or by mail ...
and return the equipment after test!

What is so special that you like best

it is a cheap tool ... but the sound quality is average
= This is ideal for learning to work! the job is in the mix with this microphone!

the least?
is mechanically sound but the components are of low quality
= Switches that crackle and hum appearing in use,
loss of bandwidth over time = this will not be an investment for life!

# How would you rate the quality / price?

excellent, a pair of microphones multi-directional nine to 100 euros (the price of a sm57) that want the best, we should not exaggerate and compare the incomparable, it seems obvious that when you do not have a large budget can not expect to hear the sound of a real microphone for this price, let's be realistic! more if you want the best should have the complete fleet of dedicated and specialized microphones (dynamic - static - cardio - omni - lamp etc. ...).

# Knowing what you know now, would you make the same choice? ..
.
YES of course, otherwise he must save .. very very much!
This microphone is correct and can learn to do the best with what little we have!
(Learning placement natural stereo panorama without retouch
varying angles, axes, spacing, distances from the source
and the multiple combinations possible thanks to its multi-directional)
its quality is not commensurate with its price! it is better!

I hope to soon offer me better
(Multi-directional pair large diaphragm or other type rodeNT2000 .... C414)
but it will cost 5 to 10 times the minimum for more reliable and sounding on top ...
but it must capture the signal chain is as consistent and qualitative
= If it is to save a neumann AC97 sound card with a PC, it's useless
(Although it may be pleasant surprises for little we know what we did!)

Me, I work alone in re-recording and stereo equipment can be narrow sectional in music
and creativity to express themselves and not get lost in handling
= Once played, recorded soon!
is the ideal material for a "home-studio owners-musician" who wants to agree to lesser charges
without taking the head (semi pro models) is not an album project and / or meet the requirement of customers billed at that price it's obvious!
but you'll be surprised at its versatility and its effectiveness in use despite its shortcomings the original ...