Price engine
Classified Ads
RaphRaymond 02/16/2006

Oktava MK-319 : RaphRaymond's user review


  • Like
  • Tweet
  • Partager
  • Submit
  • Email
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 ...


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'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 ( and U87 (http://raphael. (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]