All user reviews for the Oktava MK-319

I have this microwave for 3 years I am delighted that all of the great micro, we have done in a professional studio grenoble when recording a group of Pro isere done blind tests and Neuman U87 Oktava MK319 believe me it had to look for the difference, maybe a slight more acute almost imperceptible on the treble on some female voices.

If the grain is warm / big sound on.

OVERALL OPINION

- How long have you use it? 3 years
- What is the particular feature you like best and least? Hot sounds. Heavy. Fragile seems - he
- Have you tried many other models before acqurir? Rode NT2, NeumannU87, AT3030
- How do you report qualitprix? Excellent
- With the exprience, you do again this choice? ... I have three now.

Russian Micro static cardio with att -10 dB and high pass
warm and soft, lacks a bit of prsence and wealth

OVERALL OPINION

The MK 319 is unfortunately not the best microclimate of the brand, the 219 and 319 microphones are good enough to sound warm and Retailer despite a body of the microphone noise limit of the acceptable! ! ds that one touches the microphone, the body it produces an almost harmonic, as it sounds hollow and pressures trs rsonnances of the body even give an impression of the microphone a little search and dstabilisante stick when it comes to micro !!!!!
Briefly, the quality of mtal uses is the cause of this large dfault trs (Russia forces)
elastic suspension is the first Bond Remde such misfortune, the next will probably be a slight cut down (against the infra), the troisme finally to surround the body of a piece of micro rubber tighten all around the microphone, it absorbs much of the energy produced by the body into rsonnance microphone (shortcut time rsonnace mdium the bottom).

Large diaphragm condenser microphone

Directivity: Cardioid
Frequency response: 40 Hz to 16 kHz
Sensitivity: 11 mV / Pa
Max SPL: 122db (0.5% THD)
Noise (DIN): <14 dBa
Output impedance: 200 ohms

- Attenuation pad
- Low-Cut 80Hz

OVERALL OPINION

My opinion would be a pale copy of what marked the druid.
I refer you to an opinion that I share completely.

It's a microphone that I really appreciate it a really strong character. Very mild (such as MK012), which is an important criterion for me.

For the first micro? I do not know if I really advise ... In this price range is more than some because it's either that or a Chinese. The choice is quickly made for me.
If we can put a little more, Rode made products more "versatile" (but with less character)

It is best to listen, really.

It is a condenser microphone, large diaphragm, cardioid only, intended for making voice nearby, spoken or sung ... It is equipped with a low-cut and a 10dB attenuator, using two switches, these switches are dancing a little jig on the body of the microphone, but for now I had no problem with them then ...
It comes in a kit with tweezers. No box, no suspension ...
For these last three points that I am not 10, it is full of little things not very important ... but the cumulative ...

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for 3 or 4 months and is present on some of my recent compositions. Refer to the appropriate forums to it to see if it is he who plays or my sm58 ... normally the difference jumps to the ears but ...
This is my first static staff and I use it almost exclusively on my voice, sometimes on a folk guitar but as I now MK012 it serves me more than the voice.
I chose this microwave according to my voice, I took it warm and not too keen to erase some access my voice shrill and nasal. I recommade so to all those who have deep voices to flatter or appease treble voices.

I put that opinion to the test that I conducted between the MK319, a Neumann U87 AKG C414 and a. I&#39;m not too much about the AKG because they are quite the opposite, the highlight of the akg being more in the upper midrange and brilliance, it does not suit me at all, I have not pushed the test too away with that one. The U87 is against well known for its "warm precision".
First I should say a bit about how I took the test. The two microphones were head against head, one above the other (in this case the Neumann was upside down, the Oktava to the place) the centers of the capsules were therefore to some small centimeters of gap. The decision was made with my own singing voice, behind an anti-pop to about 8cm at the junction of two heads (which did not touch of course). The preamps were those of a Sony DMX R-100, encoding ADAT also capture was made on a Pro Tools HD via 96 I / O, listening on a pair of Genelec 1030 studio rather well Treaty.

While the overall tone is still super super close! No sensitivity, Neumann is much more sensitive than the Oktava. After spending several plays at the same level, Neumann offers a slightly better accuracy over the entire spectrum, especially in the treble, but this is not the strong point of the Oktava, it could therefore be expected. All the medium, between 700Hz and 2kHz is a little more present on the Neumann (it&#39;s really very light, like 0.5 dB, but it gives more grain and intelligibility) on the other hand in the lower medium is to misunderstand. For severe (<250 Hz approximately) the Neumann is more accurate and maybe a little nicer, but the Oktava has a very kind of the compression "and manages natural that I love. It sagit course of a purely aesthetic view, subjective and totally annexe of my voice and my tastes.

These are wav (16bit 44.1kHz, voluntarily, and because it&#39;s enough to compare two microphones): MK319 (http://raphael.raymond.free.fr/mk319.wav) and U87 (http://raphael. raymond.free.fr/u87.wav) (3MB each, listen to them at the same level to compare the timbre, the U87 to an output level greater than the Oktava!) despite cutting heterogeneous THIS IS the same taken simultaneously. Uh I was very enruhmé but here we do not have the sound of singing Heiniger? To you to compare these mics for yourself about your listening! We&#39;ll talk about in the forums!

In conclusion I would say that, always on my voice, if Neumann is greater than the MK319 (one would have suspected anyway), the Oktava is really not far behind, the main difference being in the high precision and . The Oktava equalizing very well in these areas then I&#39;m not ready to change! Or in 20 years when I could as super high end stuff but it&#39;s not even say when that day comes ...

It has a Q / P really good since it costs less than € 150, it is a choice I would recommend to everyone, despite a small warning. I did practically tested on my voice and everyone has not my voice. For example, one day I recorded a female voice rather shrill and nasal sound was really not great, not very pretty, one felt the microphone next to his plate, the main form of the voice was almost as low point, or at least not the strengths of this microphone. So a very good microphones, but not for everyone. Despite this warning message I would like compared to the U87 road since sagit-is a purely relative comparison to the two microphones and not my real voice. If you know how your voice sounds in a U87 vows will not have many surprises in this Oktava less what I just described.

[edit at the replay on the HD25 difference may be a little more than that I described here, but it&#39;s still very good for the Oktava]

Everyone talks about ... So ...

useful for singing but also full of various instruments, including those who want a nice low ... but also that the static "mode to" make aggressive (because of too high), gender dulcimer, acoustic guitar string nickel etc ... but not for overheads.

it is a less flattering rode NT2, a tlm 103 etc ... as seems to have less acute.
However, it is recoverable by boosting a little after 8 khz in the decision, if you want.

bcp it captures less background noise (of fan of ordo etc. ...), what is the advantage of a capsule a little tough (for acute!) and is useful in home studio.

OVERALL OPINION

Been used for 10 days.
I like the look, sound personality, his warmth, his original "mysterious" sound consistency (not too flashy but standing well), the response curve individually and signed with a ballpoint pen from the hand of Russian technician ... and its price / quality ratio amazing.

I like the side least 50 years of Russian DIY switches from -10 db and cutting down, moving a little on their axis and are ugly black plastic, the lack of suspension for the price (but no longer need to dream ) and very light colored "vintage" of "cast iron pipe" in the lower midrange that is very "present" but not hyper-neutral (so it depends on taste).
this color "special" (in the vicinity, but which disappears backwards beyond 35 cm) that I would not recommend it necessarily as first or as micro micro happening everywhere.

I do not regret my purchase at all (to 139 euros static "pro"!) and is ideal wherever the others are too artificial in the treble.
reliable (the plan sound ...) and simple! a very good plan ...
especially at this price!

I was not exactly the Oktava MK-319, but a modified version by Michael Jolly. In other words, a OktavaMod, MK-319 PEO Standart. It's long and it said no less.
In short, many people critical of a positively or negatively the MK-319 standart, it has less than a high frequency Neumann, it is a little muffled at the top, generous at the bottom, with a very nice color, but perhaps also due to the lack of high frequencies.

Michael Jolly proposes several changes to the Oktava, for a very reasonable price. On changing basic, it reduces the layers of the cap to a single layer instead of two, in the same vein that the AKG C12. The gold capsule was visible in the super micro changed. The original pickups are also known to be quite noisy at the suspension of the capsule. The change is a new suspension of the capsule increases 30dB isolation against vibration, mechanical reasoning in critical areas of medium frequencies.
The two switches swaying a little on some microphones are switched off in order to have the shortest path between the FET and the capsule.
All electronics is changed against a new, upscale, with a wiring Evidence Audio.

I am not the beast in technique, those who want more information can go to the website of the "modifier", www.oktavamod.com

Finally, the frequency response is improved up, I did not measure but I guess that now covers 20Hz to 20kHz. I can not compare with what it was before since I ordered it changed. But I could compare it with a Neumann TLM 47 studio and an AKG 414. Ben good luck to say which is the micro to 285 Euros ...

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for some weeks (not long what ...) but I am more than satisfied with this purchase. I have a Groove Tubes Convertible next door (ok that is 200 francs) is nice, but nothing more ... there, you really notice the difference!

What I like most at this microphone is the slightly anarchic stuff of Russian (and no, not Chinese), or not to have a standart all the studios, or otherwise it should have is not a good studio. And yet it sounds no worse. The look, once modified, with the golden capsule becomes apparent. And of course the price, unbeatable concurrency.

What I like least, it does not qu'Oktava suspension worthy of the name for this microphone, especially at the thread. The fixing clamp is really limited, it goes, but you almost forced to move around the body of the mic (52mm diameter) and the spider goes to screw on a mic because of the two screw not always correct. Well you can have your cake, butter money, but for the dairy's ass, you have to pay more.

Before buying, I compared with other models in the same price range. The Chinese, it's more a question I did not, I have no doubt they make excellent mics, but this may be a matter of principle ... no idea. The Rode seemed a bit aggressive, they are versatile, but ultimately cold. AKG C4000 or the 414 are excellent mics for the last quoted much more versatile than the Oktava, but it also has its price. Neumann, Gefell, it's pretty, but it is out of reach for my purse.

The price / quality ratio of this microphone that plays really changed in the big leagues is simply phenomenal.

I am already beginning to put aside to buy a pair of MK-012 ...

Cardioid vocals and instruments.
Capacitor, 48V required.

OVERALL OPINION

1 month, its hot, a little weak in the treble, I use it mainly for the paper clip in decision-brass section and the grain is beautiful on this instrument, I use the pad - 10db, I prefer even the AKG C 414 that I used for this purpose before. That said the 414 is much more versatile.
I do not take into micro first but I am very pleased to have him in my park, and the price did not hurt ...
Yes U87, C414, SE Electronics Z3300A, Schoeps ...
Excellent value for money, I would do this choice without hesitation.

See the reviews previous ones.
Russian Construction is bizarre, but is. The connectors are not terrible. no bote or soft suspension.

OVERALL OPINION

5 months. In the studio, I'm not excited about this microphone. It may be useful for work LGERS models of voice, piano, or a couple stro example. To isolate some of rsonances serious and the counsel of Plastok2, I put the microphone in a room air bike - engine and it works, it's much cleaner. It's the Oktava, soft, not too much clicking, clean, but not characters. It goes well on many instruments, but blah, no major or class. The voice, it is usually lack a little finesse and intelligibility of flesh. Ds that the mix is ​​complicated a little softness is lost and there is a poor man's lack of prsence. on the other hand I used to scne with a vocal ensemble, 2 Oktava 319 and an AKG C414 BXLII. Easy to work, clean, no mush in the grave. Its default, the bass should be cut drastically imprcis, lack of prsence of mdium, and treble a bit volatile but not aggressive scne render service. I got enough aisment trs natural sound and allows great freedom of movement artists. The C414 with 5 directional filters and is much more practical course, but the Oktava is not bad. It is not expensive. I have two, I do not take a troisime.

cardoide static large diaphragm.
a low cut and attenuation.
cheap construction and finishing.

OVERALL OPINION


Indeed, the case echoes it is better to isolate it.
It does not cash level. He did not have much brilliance (drop from 15K).

and yet it is not bad.

On the vote, a slight EQ gives the desired presence and arrival he is doing rather better than his natural grace AT4050. On the same voice, a venerable (but may be tired) did not satsfation UM57.
OH, it gives a good perception of space, we feel the cymbals move is alive.

This is certainly not a stupid contest, but frankly for the price it is very valid. I would not take a Troisème either.

The Oktava MK 319 is a large diaphragm condenser microphone, designed for use in the recording studio. While it is designed for studio use, it will also work in the live setting, as it is cheap enough that you don't have to worry a great deal about it breaking if you are looking for a reliable condenser microphone to record live shows. It is a well built, sturdy microphone that will last a good amount of time if treated right. The shock mount for the Oktava MK 319 usually comes separately, but is sometimes sold together with the mic.

OVERALL OPINION

I've been using the Oktava MK 319 for about a year and have found it to be a good, cheap option for a large diaphragm condenser mic. I have used this microphone for a wide array of recording applications, including for male and female lead vocals, as well as back up vocals, acoustic guitar, trumpet, saxophone, and a variety of other things. It is usually the mic that I would use if I am out of top end condenser microphones but need another one for another instrument. The sound quality of the Oktava MK 319 is pretty full sounding, which is what makes it a good vocal mic. However, it isn't the richest sounding microphone and wouldn't recommend it for recording professionals unless you have no other choice. The price of the Oktava MK 319 is what makes it such a nice option. You can get this good sounding condenser mic for an extremely reasonable price, making it perfect for home studio owners. While it won't ever match the sound of a Neumann or another top end condenser mic, it is a nice substitute for those who cannot afford a top tier mic. I would recommend the Oktava MK 319 to home studio owners looking for a cheap condenser microphone to add to their arsenal.