All user reviews of 4/5 for the The T.bone SCT2000

Micro lamp with tlcommande (slecteur directivity of 9 positions)
Large laminae ...

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for 9 months, time to get an ide in time.
Slecteur the directivity is very practical to rgler the best decision possible for testing in the studio, nice suspension. In my opinion, 2 or 3 meters over cable (it's a seven-pin to 7 meters) it would not t dplaisant.
The report price is exclent quality, I have a Rode NT2, good micro but the SCT2000 The definition is much more fine and does not bleed in mdiums, more non ngligeable.
This micro possde linear behavior, it is no surprise and adds a bit of grain (thanks lamp) in the grave, is not in the nasal and mdium not whistle in AIGS It is my humble opinion, trs neutral. Do not use a hsiter prampli well made to draw the rich ...

It is a static lamp

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for 6 months mainly for voice and acoustic guitar, he is doing well trs

Plus: It's as soft as a micro prcis totally versatile
The least: A significant effect of proximity trs

I do not have too many comparisons because I have never tried a German, but it is much more natural than the sct of 1100 Tbone and infinitely more than prcis akg c2000 b

The report quality price epoutouflant

Here's a little test on my voice with just a small compression (http://perso.club-internet.fr/arnaud.provent/mp3/sct2000-voix.mp3)

Another in yogurt + guitar + reverb compression rvox Princeton (http://perso.club-internet.fr/arnaud.provent/mp3/sct2000-voix-guit.mp3)

I am the happy owner of a 2000 T-Bone SCT last few months that I use mainly for guitar and voice. It is a micro nice but it seems to me that the technicians who STRID Describes highest performance have not done everything wrong. I think it is when even a bit limited for esprer to sound professional.
Personally I find it quite normal that a good acoustic instrument can be trs expensive and therefore the sensor for the capture the smallest nuances is also not shock me too much, especially when we know that the cot quality components are not declining, and that if one goes lectronicien a lot of time designing and couraging a microphone is a bit normal that it all reaches a cot and m me a cot certain.
I confess to be the proud Owner 'of an acoustic guitar luthier (Philippe Monneret, Mirecourt, trs the far bottom right down the hall, Vosges), jazz guitar cutaway and micro Benedetti with an acoustic sound not claim trs powerful (no rose) but trs well balanced and especially with a big personality that I gote, although sr normment (I ' had not bought it otherwise).
And of course the object is difficult to capture undermine Fidler and T-Bone is my feel a little lightweight to do so. BUT, looking for good instead of the microphone, with a prampli spl gain station 1 to rump and recorded on a Roland 1680 for your exact is made audible and honnte. So a report qualitprix trs Hon.

OVERALL OPINION

I had tried that before and SM57 and, curiously, an AKG C451E overhead, which did not so bad rsultats. But part of what I do, T-Bone seems much more convincing.
For the price I would do the choice, but if my banquire asked me to marry him, I viserais srement onreux much more. As my banquire is a banker and shall decide that I do not change their habits, I think I'll keep the little Chinese for a while, which I think is an excellent learning tool

Large diaphragm microphone lamp.
rponse in frquence: 20Hz - 20,000 Hz,
multi-directional: omni, cardioid, figure 8 and directivity intermdiaires
Max SPL: 130 dB
Comes with a carrying case, suspension, power supply ...

I do not put that 9 / 10 t becaufe filters would be welcome (but hey, we do not have everything ... oeut)

OVERALL OPINION

Hello,

I possde this mic now for almost a year and I had the opportunity to try it in several contexts, mainly tenor sax, bass, guitar, voice and mic ambience.
I could compare it with other mics including Shure SM58, SM57, Sennheiser MD441, T-BONE RB500, NEUMANN TLM103 ...

The main default of this micro-mdiums are down a bit confused and treble too hard. I would say the most obvious is:
- Between 190 and 280Hz lack of precision (a sort of veil or boiled according to the source)
- Acute and too hard to put forward 5, 8 and 10kHz.

Microphones deficits above, the MD441 me as particularly surprised and impressed, mainly on my tenor sax ...

Compared with the TLM103, despite the bump in hauts-mdiums/aigus of micro (and many modern large diaphragm microphones), the SCT2000 dire need of precision across the spectrum, the dnature Acute lot of sources adding some sort of buzz at dsagrable possible. The only advantage: the heat of the lamp helping get his hat in mdiums.

Which is not bad at all, it is the infinite possibility of directionality. As far omni: with its wide atmosphere. In cardio in proximity: its in your face. In Figure 8 prs, in your face with an ambience more dlicate. Each has a directivity curve frequencies and dynamics SPECIFICATIONS I think.

On bass: + or - 10 cm center to bridge, in omni, directed slightly to the left or right oue according gots and slightly above the fingers, in APRS laguage low-mdiums is quite plutt despite a lack of precision and the sound of strings on the fingerboard to the volume fMeasure.

On the voice: the hissing and the lack of precision of this are the low mdium also felt.

On the guitar: it may be in this area that is most comfortable if the sheet was to make a post EQ recording subtle. It's quite flattering mdiums guitar whose sound is a little too late.

On the sax: I test the tnor and (possibly also be because it's my main instrument) of the bump is unbearable and acute dnature compltement sound. I had a better rsultats SM57 is to say!


My advice would be to buy this microphone and do change (capacitors, lamp:
to buy the MD441 can find it cheap to OCCAZ (but not get a good precision dlicate static) or SAVE to buy a ribbon mic in Royer, RCA , AEA and other killings in the genre (compared to the RB500, adchire)

FOR: - the sound of the lamp
- That even when a static good quality for the price
- Changes or "upgrades" are possible and apparently effective
- The multitude of directivity is sometimes convenient
- The price I think it's hard to beat

CONS: - the microphone quickly falls into the caricature of the lamp with low-mdiums dgeulasses
- Sources for such voices and blowing, the severity of acute is my opinion rdhibitoire
Here!

[Edit: APRS new comparative tests with the Neumann TLM103, in fact the T-Bone takes the road if not for this confusion of mdiums (but provides a grain) and those few peaks trs thugs in the treble that I find difficult without turning the decision dnaturer ...]

Everything has been said level characteristics. I only changed the original lamp (very easy) with a groove tubes 12AY7.

OVERALL OPINION

I recorded the song with the original lamp and with the new. The gain in quality is notable by comparing the two recordings, we find that the highs are much less aggressive with the new lamp, more accurate. Overall, the sound is more airy, softer, softer. So do not hesitate to put € 50 in a good light, it's worth it!

I use it for more than six months. What I like most is the purity of sound, natural look and soft at once. Excellent results of the vote and including folk guitars. It shines without attacking is balanced, no need to EQ or rarely. It's pretty confusing at first by the way!

What I like least is the vagueness of the microphone in the mid-bass, bass. This micro has made a very smooth and it is mainly due to this kind of spray at low frequencies. It can be a problem on bass. In contrast, no worries on female voices, for example.

This is my first tube microphone so I can not compare. However, the price / quality ratio is really excellent. The microphone is solid as is the case that goes with it and it rings! Provide all the same one hour of heating for optimum sound.

I would do this with the case of a limited budget. Otherwise I would go see products far more serious, but more expensive too. Or use an electrostatic coupled with a good tube preamp.