|
|
Post by mike on Oct 8, 2022 12:17:57 GMT -6
I've always wondered about this microphone that struck me as a good value for the money especially if you buy used after hearing clips of it. It kind of reminds me of 67ish with a little more top end. Can any users of this mic give some feedback on it and how it compares to the other mics in your locker?
While this video below demos the Chandler TG2 500 preamp, both the speaker/guitar player and singer use an early generation of the Mojave MA200 for the mic in this video. I know there have been updates to the aesthetic appearance on the outside of the mic over time, but have no idea if there have been any changes to the design internally over the years.
I know it's a David Royer design that uses a Jensen transformer, JAN 5840 tube,.... and I think a Chinese cap, so I wonder if the top end is too much in real use or if it's just fine. Thanks in advance for any feedback on the Mojave MA200
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Oct 8, 2022 14:05:09 GMT -6
FWIW I prefer the Advanced Audio 67SE over it... If you want that 67 "modded"/Brighter open thang. Has an attractive coloration.  Chris |
|
|
|
Post by phdamage on Oct 8, 2022 14:33:54 GMT -6
Is this mic also what basically came out of his MXL 2001 tube mic mod?
|
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Oct 8, 2022 14:39:38 GMT -6
I don't own any Mojave mics but I've used them a bunch over the years... I'm a fan. The "67" ish voice? That's certainly there... and probably a bit closer to that general voicing then a lot of other things that claim to be klones. YMMV.
One of my friends has an early Mojave... I think from when David Royer was building them in garage out of gutted MXL mics? It looks really terrible. Home made power supply & so on but holy guacamole it sounds great on just about anything.
An awful lot of companies use capsules from China. Including in some very expensive, very limited production microphones. The thing is some companies? They have a way to sort & select capsules. I know one that buys about 500 at a time to keep roughly 100 for production. So I wouldn't base any judgement on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Oct 8, 2022 15:06:20 GMT -6
I have a lot of time on the MA300, it's a nice mic, works well on a lot of voices which, if you think about it is kind of a 67ish trait.
Overall, it's just kinda clean and unobtrusive. It's not super bright or anything. Not sure how different the 200 might be voiced though.
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Oct 8, 2022 16:00:15 GMT -6
For a more conventional 67 style sound IMHO... BU67.  Chris |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 8, 2022 16:05:22 GMT -6
I had one for years when they first came out... at the time they were pretty good... lot of mics around now though... I wouldn't purchase again. I also owned the MA100 same....
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Oct 9, 2022 2:38:55 GMT -6
I have a lot of time on the MA300, it's a nice mic, works well on a lot of voices which, if you think about it is kind of a 67ish trait. Overall, it's just kinda clean and unobtrusive. It's not super bright or anything. Not sure how different the 200 might be voiced though. Thanks for your reply notneeson, I think the MA200 and 300 are the same in Cardioid and the difference is the 300 offers the pad, low cut and variable polar settings on the power supply for a couple hundred more. Your comments of "it works well on a lot of voices, kinda clean and unobtrusive" makes me wonder if it benefits more from a colored pre with weight than a clean, clinical one then. I think what has peaked my curiosity after reading from a couple owners who said it compared well and close to their U67's, is the combination of hearing clips online that sound good on low male vocals, big band and acoustic instruments, but also in 2022 where the cost of a nice mic varies from higher to significantly higher, the MA200 seems to hold its own well on some sources and can be had for $600 used. |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Oct 9, 2022 3:12:58 GMT -6
I don't own any Mojave mics but I've used them a bunch over the years... I'm a fan. The "67" ish voice? That's certainly there... and probably a bit closer to that general voicing then a lot of other things that claim to be klones. YMMV. One of my friends has an early Mojave... I think from when David Royer was building them in garage out of gutted MXL mics? It looks really terrible. Home made power supply & so on but holy guacamole it sounds great on just about anything. An awful lot of companies use capsules from China. Including in some very expensive, very limited production microphones. The thing is some companies? They have a way to sort & select capsules. I know one that buys about 500 at a time to keep roughly 100 for production. So I wouldn't base any judgement on that. Thanks for your reply jmoose,
Your comments match what I've read and heard online. I agree with your thoughts about capsules from China, and have heard similar things about Mojave's QC and that David Royer burns in and vets each mic before it is ships. |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Oct 9, 2022 3:32:40 GMT -6
I had one for years when they first came out... at the time they were pretty good... lot of mics around now though... I wouldn't purchase again. I also owned the MA100 same.... Thanks for your reply Wiz,
I've not heard of the MA100 and assume it is a early model predecessor, but good thought on more competition for its price point in 2022 than when it first came out. I know you have a 87i from the 70's that sounds great and is a perfect match for your voice. But knowing those 87i mic's are now going for 3-7k USD these days, what mic's would you prefer for vocal/acoustics over the MA200/300 in the used price range of $600-800+ USD these days ?
Thanks,
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Oct 9, 2022 11:10:42 GMT -6
I have a lot of time on the MA300, it's a nice mic, works well on a lot of voices which, if you think about it is kind of a 67ish trait. Overall, it's just kinda clean and unobtrusive. It's not super bright or anything. Not sure how different the 200 might be voiced though. Thanks for your reply notneeson, I think the MA200 and 300 are the same in Cardioid and the difference is the 300 offers the pad, low cut and variable polar settings on the power supply for a couple hundred more. Your comments of "it works well on a lot of voices, kinda clean and unobtrusive" makes me wonder if it benefits more from a colored pre with weight than a clean, clinical one then. I think what has peaked my curiosity after reading from a couple owners who said it compared well and close to their U67's, is the combination of hearing clips online that sound good on low male vocals, big band and acoustic instruments, but also in 2022 where the cost of a nice mic varies from higher to significantly higher, the MA200 seems to hold its own well on some sources and can be had for $600 used. The studio where the mic lives has a few options, when using a Phoenix DRS 2 with the MA300 I tended to push the pre as it’s pretty clean otherwise. With a UA610 it’s maybe a little denser to start with, in a good way. That’s not a go to pre for me, but I cut some background vocals on that chain a while back and it was really quite nice. |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 9, 2022 16:35:07 GMT -6
I had one for years when they first came out... at the time they were pretty good... lot of mics around now though... I wouldn't purchase again. I also owned the MA100 same.... Thanks for your reply Wiz,
I've not heard of the MA100 and assume it is a early model predecessor, but good thought on more competition for its price point in 2022 than when it first came out. I know you have a 87i from the 70's that sounds great and is a perfect match for your voice. But knowing those 87i mic's are now going for 3-7k USD these days, what mic's would you prefer for vocal/acoustics over the MA200/300 in the used price range of $600-800+ USD these days ?
Thanks,
Mike
Hi Mike wow, 87is for 7K!!!!!! one of the things I didn't like about the ma200 was that the tube was soldered in...the MA100 was their tube SDC....its going on 20 years since I owned them. I have been through a lot of microphones, like a lot of us, trying whatever is the latest thing.... the only ones that stayed are the U87i and the KM84. Personally, I think its the capsules that are the biggest problem. Neumann just seem to have that down. Often when I would try a new microphone (Warm, BeesNeez, Stam etc) it would sound cool on its own, but the 87 would beat it out in the end at the end of the mix. I am so happy I found that microphone. I just have so much confidence singing into it. (which is probably half the battle really). I am not sure what would work for you...and all I could make is generic forum suggestions, like try them and return them if you can.... is it just for you ? or clients? If I had my time over again... I would just buy a 87 from the start.. lord knows I spent 3 times what it cost chasing a cheaper outcome. cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Oct 9, 2022 21:24:52 GMT -6
I had one for years when they first came out... at the time they were pretty good... lot of mics around now though... I wouldn't purchase again. I also owned the MA100 same.... Thanks for your reply Wiz,
I've not heard of the MA100 and assume it is a early model predecessor, but good thought on more competition for its price point in 2022 than when it first came out. I know you have a 87i from the 70's that sounds great and is a perfect match for your voice. But knowing those 87i mic's are now going for 3-7k USD these days, what mic's would you prefer for vocal/acoustics over the MA200/300 in the used price range of $600-800+ USD these days ?
Thanks,
Mike
I've heard a lot of positive comments over the years about the MA200, including from some notable engineers like Andrew Scheps. I've not used one, but if budget was a concern I wouldn't be afraid of trying it. There might be others more versatile. If the range is $600-$800 I'd be looking at some of the U87 clones: UT Twin 87, Stam SA-87, or Serrano 87. I have the Serrano and feel it's every bit as good as a Neumann. It'll work well for vocals and acoustics. I think the Lewitt LCT 640 TS is nice for most sources. Probably underrated for vocals. Maybe a used Shure KSM 44, as they normally sell new a bit higher. Those are really nice. Vanguard V4. |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Oct 10, 2022 7:42:53 GMT -6
Thanks for your feedback guys. I have both expensive and comparatively inexpensive mic’s that all sound good to ok depending on source, room and placement and think there is a time and a place for both. Sometimes I hear the difference in resolution, a smooth top end or other attributes in the expensive mic’s that make the difference in price worth it. Other times the difference between the two is more apples/oranges different but not necessarily better just because of a name or higher cost. I do appreciate a good value. Not in a cutting corners first priority way, but in a makes good sense to me when it sounds good way. Listening with a good set of phones to the video I liked the way the mojave sounded on the guys voice that led me to wanting more user feedback on it knowing the mic could be had for $600 used.
Thanks for your replies, I appreciate it, Mike |
|
|
|
Post by sean on Oct 10, 2022 7:54:45 GMT -6
My opinion on every Mojave microphone I've used, which is limited to the MA-101, MA-201, and MA-200 is they are punch above their weight, especially on the second hand market, and you can get great results with them.
|
|
