Rode Classic II MIC applications

[HA_DA_JA]

I have had this mic for about 3-4 years now and it hardly gets used. What are people using this mic for?
I have found very little use for other than being an expensive acoustic instrument mic.
I have tried it on mainly on male voclas and it doesnt work nealry as well as my other cheaper mics.
I thoungt it was broken so i sent all my Rode mics back to get serviced (for free what a great service) and my favourite other Rode mic that I love using was the one that needed fixing - Go figure !
I am not saying that I am a die hard ROde fan I just have been using these as well as other branded mics as part of my daily (or should I say monthly) use as hobby engineer.
Any suggestions or experiences would be highly appreciated.
Cheers
Dale

[Chris H]

These are the LDC's i use regularly. Rode Classic & K2, AT 4060, Neuman U87. So the classic sometimes is the choice for Female Vox, Guitar Cabs, Bass Cabs, Kick drum , a foot or so from the head. Also for acoustic guitar in Fig 8 to reduce spll when tracking vox at the same time. Did afemale singer who was playind piano and the Classic was great on her voice in Fig 8 to reject the piano spill. I was surprised at the separation it gave.

[Thirteen]

I have found them to work well on female chest voice, but can be shrill with a strong head voice. I found the Classic 1 worked better though overall for female vocals. Rode do make very good mics, I toured their factory earlier in the year and was stunned at the investment that was being put into manufacturing there, the giant CNC machines with insane tolerance specs, diaphragm sputtering and so on. It is clear that QC is a big part of their manufacturing process. I use Rode mic's a lot, I think that the only real wall that I keep coming up against is the strong presence peak that seems to be common to all the LDC's in the range.

[tunetown]

The Classic II works well with Acoustic Guitar, Female Vocal and some male vocal. It wont work on all vocals but the ones it does really shine.

Sasha Dobson's vocal on this album were recorded by Terry Manning using the Rode Classic II. http://www.sashadobson.com/music.php

Cheers
Peter

[tonymite]

Apparently changing the tube & swapping the output transformer can do wonders.

[tunetown]

Mine sounds fine stock. Maybe the valve in the one you tried was dodgy.

There was a mega mic shootout on GS some time ago. The Rode Classic II came second. Here is the link to the original thread and the reveal link.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... rding.html
http://gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear ... otout.html

This is a very useful mic on many applications.

Cheers
peter

[Linear]

Hi,

Yeah I wouldn't bother changing transformer - why would you?

I use it often as an outside kick mic, although it works really well on certain voices. Also works great on acoustic guitar

It's a great mic, way up there with the best.

Chris

[tonymite]

Hre's what a certain guru / tosser - ( aren't we all ?? ) has to say:


I started using RODE mics long time agon, when they
first came out with the NT2...they are EXCELLENT mics,
and NOW, with the new models, represent the best real value
in tube mics, in my opinion..there is a HUGE differance
between the CHEAP chinese condensers, and the RODE models..
i have worked with RODE, and know the circuits inside thier mics,
and while i cannot disclose them, i can say they are WORLDS above
the power supplies, and components used in many VERY expensive
vintage classics.
They also manage to VOICE the mics to have a SIMILAR signature,
across the product line, even though from an ELECTRONIC standpoint,
the models represent MANY differant advance designs, and this is NOT
an easy thing to do.
this is where we differ in opinion, i would , instead, concentrate on
exploiting and expanding on DIFFERANCES between designs...in fact, my
mods for rode mics involve this ..and updating for performance, in general
WHERE POSSIBLE, at all. THey are pretty much stateof the art, in build
quality, power supply design, capsules are amazing...buttt...
my MAIN referance mics are a pair of CLASSIC TWO, which have the wonderfull
remote pattern switching, which gives possibilities that you simply have
to hear to appreciate. I must ADD though, that i DIFFER in opinion
with RODE about some transformer and component choices, because i
have heard things they havent, as yet. I changed the transformer on my
classic TWO, for the one i have custom wound for me, and use on my mic pre
kit, tube headphone amps, etc..and the differance is simply NOT TO BE BELIEVED.
I have compared the result of this with the top models of NEUMANN and BRAUNER,
LAWSON, DPA, TELEFUNKEN, AKG,etc...and they have become my referance standard

They recently sent me an NTK model, which has a solid state output, and 6dj8 FAMILY
of tube..I found it had similar voicing to the classic two, in its stock form, but
had a GLARE, and a lot of compression, that i simply couldnt live with, having
been spoiled by the performance of the admittedly much more expensive classic TWO.
Since there was no transformer to upgrade, i was limited to upgrading the capacitors
that couple the signal path, but the BIGGEST CHANGE was changing the Tube..
I have a good selection of all brands of vintage tubes, in many types, and as there is
no black plate vintage equivelent of the 6dj8, i chose to try to go with revoicing the mic
and found an NOS type which gives INCREDABLE change to the mic...SILKY , featheRy top end,
like some of the finest ribbons in my collection, but with the slight presence boost you get
with condenser capsules, and suprizingly, a HUGE reduction in the compression i was hearing
with the stock mic.
HOwever, my TRANSFORMER mod to the CLASSIC TWO, make it the TOP MIC i have heard, at any price.
its NOT that expensive for me to do, for you..but , sadly, its a one way trip. i cannot always save
the original transformer..so, its a huge leap of faith, unless you can actually COME to my studio, and
hear the differance for yourself. I did extensive audio testing, between the STOCK and MODIFIED unit, and
there is NO comparison.

[TimS]

So who is the 'guru' then Tony?? Maybe shed a little light?
Unreferenced quotes dont really hold up.
A quote is only as good as the name it came from..

Tim..

[HA_DA_JA]

I have seen this quote before from a guy in USA who does mods. IT was nothing guaranteed. So dont get the idea that this has been made up. I thought about getting it down but only very briefly.
Cheers

[HA_DA_JA]

http://www3.telus.net/public/vintage1/record.htm

Scroll down to the Rode section and there it is.
Cheers
Dale

[tunetown]

Here's some words on Rode by Terry Manning.

http://compasspointstudios.com/rode.html

Cheers
Peter

[Chris H]

Here's some words on Rode by Terry Manning.

http://compasspointstudios.com/rode.html

Cheers
Peter

With this type of endorsement, and regular positive posts re Rode mics in another forum, I can't help wondering if Terry has an arrangement for promoting Rode mics. No offense to you Terry if you read this. It seems to me this is fairly common on the internet where pros with a good name will give a product a good word yet there is no disclosure of a business afiliation. What do others reckon?

[TimS]

I have seen this quote before from a guy in USA who does mods. IT was nothing guaranteed. So dont get the idea that this has been made up. I thought about getting it down but only very briefly.
Cheers

Dale, I didnt say that it was made up.
I just think if people are going to quote (or reference people or a written piece on the internet) then they should post the link to the actual reference.
If you were writing a paper, you would have to reference the source - I think the same should apply.
I'm not dismissing Tony that his quote was false or anything, i just wanted to know where it came from..
Peace bro..
Tim..

[tunetown]

Yeh, It does smell of endorsment. I was quite surprised when reading. Even still, If I had his reputation I'm not sure I would risk damaging it on rubbish products. He has stated on other forums that he uses these mics on many diferent things. In fact he recently, as I posted earlier, used the Classic II on a singer who prefereed it to any of his vintage collection.

Cheers
Peter

[Chris H]

Yeh, It does smell of endorsment. I was quite surprised when reading. Even still, If I had his reputation I'm not sure I would risk damaging it on rubbish products. He has stated on other forums that he uses these mics on many diferent things. In fact he recently, as I posted earlier, used the Classic II on a singer who prefereed it to any of his vintage collection.

Cheers
Peter

Given his position in the industry, i'm of the opinion he would not say positive things about them if he thought they were crap mics. So i think he uses and likes Rode mics but it also seems he may have an arrangement to promote them. Maybe i'm being a bit cynical, or just seeing an example of a business promotion strategy. It is a bit sneaky but has integrity if the mics are liked and used.

[tonymite]

[quote="TimS"][quote="HA_DA_JA"]I have seen this quote before from a guy in USA who does mods. IT was nothing guaranteed. So dont get the idea that this has been made up. I thought about getting it down but only very briefly.
Cheers[/quote]
Dale, I didnt say that it was made up.
I just think if people are going to quote (or reference people or a written piece on the internet) then they should post the link to the actual reference.
If you were writing a paper, you would have to reference the source - I think the same should apply.
I'm not dismissing Tony that his quote was false or anything, i just wanted to know where it came from..
Peace bro..
Tim..[/quote]


ctrl+c
ctrl+v

into search engine



He says he uses ' custom wound ' Lundahl transformer which I reckon's a loda-crap. I think i've worked out which TX he uses in his mod ... and he swaps the tube for one of a gazillion substitutes.

It's as much a mod as me singing into it in head voice, chest voice, falseto, no vibrato or Sammy Jones vibrato.

Mods are fairly subjective - so I don't see why I have to validate or reference ... I did have an " apparently" disclaimer.

Imagine all those ppl on gearslutz that have used/heard nothing else but the Apogee Rosetta and say " get the Rosetta... Get the Rosetta... It's the best converter... it'll even make your dick bigger" - had to ' reference " their oppinions ??

[Aearth]

I just feel there are better mics out there than the Classic II.

nIC

[tonymite]

[quote="Aearth"]I just feel there are better mics out there than the Classic II.

nIC[/quote]

better ??

[Ausrock]

He says he uses ' custom wound ' Lundahl transformer which I reckon's a loda-crap. I think i've worked out which TX he uses in his mod ... and he swaps the tube for one of a gazillion substitutes.

It's as much a mod as me singing into it in head voice, chest voice, falseto, no vibrato or Sammy Jones vibrato.

Mods are fairly subjective - so I don't see why I have to validate or reference ... I did have an " apparently" disclaimer.

Imagine all those ppl on gearslutz that have used/heard nothing else but the Apogee Rosetta and say " get the Rosetta... Get the Rosetta... It's the best converter... it'll even make your dick bigger" - had to ' reference " their oppinions ??

Where in that quote does he say his custom transformer is a Lundahl?

And where is your "apparently" disclaimer?

I trust we won't see your post edited to include these things.

[tonymite]

Apparantly is the word I begin with ... ie:

Apparently changing the tube & swapping the output transformer can do wonders. - end quote.



Now .. Pat mentions using the same ' magical" transformer as he uses in his ' magical ' J-FET mic pre ... the pre " loosely " based around an API 312 with the MM-992 Forsell gain block ... any farken looser and you'll be left with the power supply -

He mentions there that it's custom wound for him by Lundahl .. I think it's just a LL 1636 and have inquired at Lundahl and there's no reason you couldn't run it backwards as a Mic TX.

[smash]

Firstly to be upfront. One of the companies that I work for sells Rode microphones.
I don't think it clouds my opinion, but I wanted to be honest.

I was assisting in a session for a "name" singer. I won't disclose who, because I don't believe I have the right to use her name without her consent.

All I am going to say is we tried a number of microphones, including U47's, U67's, U87's a C12 and a cpl of vintage ribbons also. We ended up going for the Classic on a number of tracks.

On the whole, I think something like a U47 is normally better - I would hate to have the typical Rode presence peak forced on me for every singer I record, however why is it so unbelievable, that a name engineer wouldn't find a "cheaper" mic a better choice in some situations.

[TimS]

Tony,
I wasnt having a go at you personally, I was just interested to "see" where the information you quoted came from..
Afterall, you said he was a guru!!
If there was a link to the guru's quote, simple..
ctrl+c
ctrl+v
just like you said.

:-)
Peace bro..
Tim..

[tonymite]

http://www3.telus.net/public/vintage1/

[TimS]

Thanks Tony :-}
Dale posted this link earlier in the thread..

[tonymite]

I know.

Thanks Dale
Thanks Tim
Thanks Tony


All I know is that on some of the forums he's considered an AudioPHOOL and that he's full of schit whilst others keep coming back to him.

I dunno 'bout ALL those CAPITAL letters and SPEELING mistakes.

[tunetown]

I just feel there are better mics out there than the Classic II.

nIC

Sure, No one said it was "the best mic". There are also worse mics out there. Overall, my assesment is it's a very good value microphone which works well on many sources. I am still searching for "the" mic which works well on every source. My U87 with the Innertube mod is close but that's a $6000 mic.

The search continues.

Cheers
Peter

[Martin]

more importantly i want some info on upgrading the tube in an NTK... that sounds like a fun experiment...

[TimS]

After reading a few reviews now, I'm thinking an NT1000 is worth purchasing...
Hmmm....
Peter's Classic II sounds awesome - very nice mic..

[chris p]

more importantly i want some info on upgrading the tube in an NTK... that sounds like a fun experiment...

FWIW I "upgraded" the tube in my old Aphex 107 preamp with a Tungsol AU07 that had undergone the cryogenic thing. Not that I buy into the cryogenic thing, it just happened that the tube I got had undergone the process.

However, at the same time I played around with the tube bias and ended up with a sound I really like. Was it the tube or the bias? A bit of both? Who knows - I'm not about to swap the old tube back in to find out. What I would say is that tubes, in sonic impact, are more than resistors, but less than IC's. A good IC makes a real impact over a crappy one, but a crappy 2c mass produced resistor sounds pretty much like a gold plated hand wound one. Tubes lie in between - you can get sonic improvements through buying a better tube, but its at the edges. Expect a little improvement, or maybe just a difference, from the upgrade, rather than a miracle.

As to the rest of this thread, what's the idea of looking for a golden mic that does everything? Wouldn't you then need to buy, like, 20 of them to actually record stuff. And wouldn't 20 of the same mics sound bland, no matter how good? I think Dale's original post and the first 3 replies were the ones on the money here - the helpful issue is what use do people actually find for mic X, rather than is mic X the best in the world or better/worse than mic Y. An awful lot of major vocals are done on the trusty 57 or 58, after all.