Review: Sennheiser Urbanite XL Headphones- Sophisticated Design, Impeccable Build Quality

Sennheiser impressed last year with their high-end Momentum headphones, and now they're positioning the Urbanite line as their mid-range audio experience.

A unique blend of modern design and incredible build quality, do these cans have what it takes to stand up to more established "FashionPhones" brands? Let's take a listen!



Shop the Urbanite XL's on Amazon.

Glamor Shot of My OLD MKH 416-P48

I bought my 416 used when I moved out to LA. I prefer buying new gear (especially microphones because of hygiene issues), but my 416 came in this rad little wooden box!

It's the little things really...

I use Sennheiser HD25's to monitor.
I love them. They are my favorite closed back headphones.
However the earpads wear out REALLY quickly, and mine were getting really ratty.

I couldn't find ANY replacements in town, and the online shops that carried them were all over seas.
Replacement pads were going to run me $20-30 before shipping. That's not horrible considering the HD25's run $200, but if replacement parts were going to be THAT difficult to procure, I was seriously considering new cans.

As a last ditch effort I called up Sennheiser, and low and behold they had some in stock.

For $11 a pair!

It's like I've got brand new headphones again!

Voice Over News Sound Bites - Mics, Bob Souer, Stephen Fry, SAG & AMPTP, and more...

Couple quick stories I think you'll dig...

David Houston has written a great FIVE PAGE story on getting into voice over. It's posted up at Helium. Go read it!

I've been very excited by RODE releasing the NTG-3, a $700 shotgun mic to compete against the MKH416, and Ty Ford has a CRAZY in depth comparison between the two. Does RODE have what it takes to unseat the Senny? Found via VOMicTest.

VoiceOverXtra interviews Bob "The Man" Souer (nickname mine). If you've read anything about VO blog-wise, you've probably read Bob. He's got a great out look on this business, and is quite possibly one of the most gracious writters I've ever met. Check it out for some nice insight!

I've just recently found the gloriousness which is "A Bit of Fry and Laurie", so I was mega-stoked to here that Stephen Fry has just signed on to do Fable 2. Woot!

Lastly, Hollywood Reporter has released the transcripts of the SAG/AMPTP negotiations. Interesting stuff...

Living Room Laboratory - The AKG D202 "Rocket"

I've been getting my hands on some really fun old mics. First the SM56, then the MD421-U-5, and now this AKG D202 "Rocket".

This mic was given to me from a friend who runs a studio. Sat in a box, it didn't sound all that great (compared to the Neumanns they use), and no one even knew what it was as all the badges ("we no need no stinking BADGERS!") and labeling had been torn off. Add to that, it also didn't fit in ANY standard sized mic holder, and just to use it they had to rig a shotgun shockmount. No fun at all...

So they gave it to me!

The D202 is an odd little duck. First manufactured in 1966 (I have no idea when this particular mic was made, as there are no serial numbers), it was AKG's first dual element microphone.
High frequency sound is captured under the nose cone, low frequency sound captured by the XLR connector, and the two elements communicating over a cross over which runs the length of the mic. This process leads to a directional mic with almost no proximity effect. It also seems to lead to a more fragile mic, with many complaints online of D202's being sold with busted LF elements.


The mic's design SCREAMS 1960's. They don't call it "The Rocket" for nuthin. The vents in the tail are actually functional, aiding in low frequency accuracy, and the nose cone is made of sintered bronze, creating a built in pop/spit/dust guard. I don't even know what sintering IS! [Sintering is a method for making objects from powder, by heating the material (below its melting point - solid state sintering) until its particles adhere to each other. Sintering is traditionally used for manufacturing ceramic objects, and has also found uses in such fields as powder metallurgy. -- Ed.]

So how does this D202 sound?

Well, considering the amount of damage, not bad, and surprisingly the LF element is functional. I broke out some Aesop this time, instead of my usual Poe, and did a comparison between this Rocket, and my new dynamic sweet-heart the MD421-U-5. I recorded dry, directly to my FW410, approximately 3 inches from the grill/nose of each mic. I did compress in post, then mixed down to 320Kbps MP3.

MD421:


AKG D202:


Yup, this mic has NO PROXIMITY. I sound a lot thicker on the MD421 at this distance. Even though the low frequency element is working (I confirmed by rolling through the bass cut), I sound a little hollow. I think the D202 is a little closer to accurate, but reality is probably somewhere in between the 421 and the 202.
Again, the MD421 shows what a champ it is dealing with plosives, the 202 suffering through almost as much as a naked SM57.
Off axis rejection was about equal surprisingly enough. That's pretty impressive considering the the D202's lack of proximity. I'm surpised we don't see more specialty mics using this process, as it works REALLY well. Could it be an issue of durability?

In all, I was surprised at how well the AKG did. Through scrapes, scuffs, and a big ole dent in the nose cone (probably from a fall that dented the bronze), it's still got a usable sound. I don't think it's particularly honest anymore, but as an effect mic, or on certain voices or instruments, it still delivers an interesting sound.


Two last notes.
I found the mic holder that I got with the M-Audio Aries is a PERFECT fit for the D202 if you're missing the original mic clip.

Also, I just want to thank coutant.org, barryrudolph.com, and the AKG Library Product Archive for helping me find info on this very unique microphone!

Living Room Laboratory: The Sennheiser MD421-U-5

It's a beautiful day (windows wide open with 70 degree weather), Mrs. Audio Guy is outta town, and Biggs is being chill.

Let's play a little!

About two months before we moved, a reader of the blog sold me an old (OLD) used Sennheiser MD421-U-5. He was cleaning out his mic cabinet, and came across this old Senny, which he had purchased in the 90's, then just never really used. He was well stocked on SM7's and RE20's, so off this mic went. To me. For little more than the cost of shipping. Woot!

I don't know exactly how old it is, but it is a fairly early serial number for the U-5 (#2097, and I've seen serials as high 55,000 on ebay), so I'm thinking it was made in the early 80's or late 70's.

A little history, the MD421 is probably the microphone most responsible for Sennheiser having a presence in the US microphone market today. Thomas Schillinger sold 600 MD421's to NBC in the late 60's, getting the microphone into the hands of recording and broadcast engineers across the country, and to date, the MD421 (and it's updates) remains one of the highest selling microphones of all time.

I've NEVER used one before.

These days, the dynamic microphones of choice seem to be the Electrovoice RE20, or the Shure SM7B. Most VO pros I know go for those, a large diaphragm condenser, or Sennheiser's now ubiquitous shotgun, the MKH416.

I don't run a booth out of my home anymore, so I thought it would be fun to throw some kit out on the living room floor. I recorded a little Poe (you know me and Poe), and to compare I also recorded on another dynamic microphone, the Shure SM57 (my personal fave "do anything" mic). The recording chain was Microphone to ART Tube PAC to NRV10 to laptop.
So how did it sound?

Here's the MD421:

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

And here's the SM57:

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

First up, this mic is QUIET. I plugged it into my preamp, and dialed up about 20dB of gain, and saw nothing. I had to hit the MD421 with 45dB of input for it to register my voice at a comfortable speaking level. By comparison the SM57 needed only 30dB of gain to match the output of the MD421. I've never had to do that before. I'm pretty confident I could scream myself mute into this thing and be NOWHERE near damaging the cartridge.
The tone is pretty smooth, and I think it fattens up the bassier end of my thin little voice. From memory, I feel it exhibits more proximity effect than RE20's I've used. Good to know if you're going for an intense "trailer" sound.
The SM57 did a much better job with off-axis rejection (picking up little surrounding noise except for what's directly in front of it), but the MD421 was certainly no slouch (remember I was recording 4 feet from an open window overlooking a fairly busy street in Studio City). Also, the MD421 was MUCH more tolerant of plosive b's and p's (a problem of mine), and something the SM57 can be a little fragile about. I feel I could comfortably use the 421 without a pop shield or sock.

I'm really excited about this mic. It probably wont see tons of action as I prefer condensers for most of my VO, but the times I need to record really loud sessions, this baby's going right up front to the top of my list. I'm this mic's third owner, and I'm really stoked to be giving it a good home!

Are you looking for a NEW MD421?

Audio Guy Mailbag: A Question on Earbuds

This is a perfect follow up to my post about Dr. Kiki.

So earbuds are bad. Are headphones any better than earbuds?
-B.A.K.

I guess I should clarify. It's not that earbuds themsleves are bad for you, it's how we use them that's the problem.
In the past there has always been a limit to how much we can bombard our ears with directly. A tape would have to be flipped, a cd would be over in under an hour, double A batteries would run out, something would prevent you from being able to saturate your ears for too long. Now with mp3 players (with built in, all day lasting batteries) there's no reason not to soak your ears in sound all day and all night.

Earbuds (the cheap kind that normally come with mp3 players) SUCK for this kind use. They don't create ANY seal around the outside of the ear, so your music is competing with the noise in your environment. The only way to combat that is to turn the volume up higher. The louder the volume, the less time you have before you're doing subtle (but possibly permanent) damage to your hearing.

The alternative is to use ANYTHING with some kind of noise reduction. I like inner-aural earbuds (the kind with rubber or foam that go INSIDE your ear canal), but some people think they're uncomfortable.
You could also check out headphones that have active noise removal (but that might mean keeping some batteries on hand). Regardless, if you can strip out the noise of your surrounding environment, then you can listen to your music at a lower volume, without sacrificing the quality of music (in fact, it'll probably sound better for it), which should give you more listening time before you exhaust your ears.
Right now I use Sennheiser CX300's for listening to music, and Sennheiser HD25-1 II's for recording. I guess I'm just a Sennheiser kinda guy...

At the turn of the millenium, white earbuds were a fashion statement.
Now?
Toss em. They're crap.

someaudioguy some audio guy music recording voice over production voice acting demo adr dubbing headphones earbuds science health hearing

Apple forcing us to turn down the volume?

So, this story isn't new, been floating around teh intarwebs since before Xmas (and I've written about this before), but I still think it's worth taking a quick look at.
The Telegraph reported on Dec 23rd, that Apple has filed a patent that would allow future iPods to calculate how long you've been listening to music, at what volume you've been listening, and would gradually turn down the volume on you. This is supposed to be a big magnanimous gesture on Apple's part, as people can plug into music all day long thanks to huge amounts of storage available. As hearing loss can be a gradual event, most people might not even know they're doing damage.
This idea sounds great in theory (like a rev limiter on car helps save fuel and forces you to not do something too stupid), but I see some huge flaws.

First off, will this be a feature we can turn off? It sounds like a silly question at first, but Apple has shown a tendency (as do a lot of tech companies) towards locking consumers into doing things their way because they "know better" (iPhone I'm looking at you). If Mommies and Daddies get concerned about little Timmy's Nano, Jobs & Co could make this a new locked in "feature" to assuage concerns, or make it painfully difficult to disable.
Why would I want to turn it off? Well the majority of the time I listen to my iPod it's usually plugged into speakers of some kind. Also I hate proprietary docks and connectors, so I plug my Nano in using the headphone jack. In my car I have a line in, and at home my stereo has an "MP3 port" (which is just a fancy way of saying "line in"). In both cases I'll jack the Nano to about 80% volume and then control the actual speaker output via the stereo. If this system is monitoring the ipods output it's going to think I'm blasting my ears for hours at a time. I don't want to be fighting my MP3 player while driving...

Secondly, this issue with people listening to music too loud for too long is mostly Apple's fault at this point. A lot of people credit the success of the ipod with the distinctive design of the white earbuds. Well guess what? Those are HORRIBLE for your ears! They don't create any seal around the ear's opening, so your music is constantly having to compete with the sounds around you. The louder the noise, the louder you'll have to turn up your music. The ipod is a fantastic DAP. The headphones included are the worst dime store crap you could put in your ears.
If Apple really cared about protecting people's hearing, they would drop these headphones immediately, or would include an accessory like the Griffin Ear Jams to help with the problem. Even the Zune includes "premium" headphones which help with noise cancellation, and should allow people to enjoy music at lower volume.

When I do listen to Nano with headphones, it's either on Sony EX51's (pictured) or Sennheiser cx300's. Even when working out, I have a hard time listening above 50% volume, which according to the Telegraph (sidebar), is about as noisy as a loud restaurant or office building, and shouldn't damage the ears for about 24 hours of listening. That's a lot of music...



Check out the article @ The Telegraph. It is an interesting read, though I really think Apple might be missing the point.

SomeAudioGuy Microphone Shoot Out!

I do quite a bit of business teaching people how to record themselves. Working in voiceover, this is becoming more and more necessary. Not that VO artists need to be full on recording engineers, but having a basic understanding of how to make their voices sound presentable is becoming more important.
At work we recently worked on a promo job where the budget was so low, that to pay for union talent they had to be able to record themselves, and send the audio back as quickly as possible. They didn't care about whisper rooms or ISDN, just a decent clean recording and a good performance. The job would've covered 30+ national promos.

Not a bad incentive to invest in some recording equipment!

My favorite setup to recommend is an external soundcard and condenser microphone. For newbies I tend to start low, say a USB MobilePre and MXL 770 (I can't say I'm a big fan of USB mics, as they don't give you anywhere to go, say you want to upgrade the mic or soundcard, you're starting from scratch all over again, not to mention adding a mixer, preamps, or monitors). Good flexibility, good sound, and all starting at under $300 (including stands and cables).

So, why not use a more expensive mic?

I get this question quite a bit. Every VO actor seems to have dreams of recording at home on a U87 or some vintage ribbon mic, and expensive mics are great, but an expensive mic wont make something sound "good-er". You get an expensive mic because it has a particular character that you are wanting to use. Personally I prefer the sound of an AKG 414 to the U87 FOR MOST PEOPLE. This is of course totally subjective as no one's really going to sound "bad" on either of these, but the Neumann will run you two to three times as much. Will you sound two to three times better?

AKG C 414 B-XL II Condenser Microphone

It's all about bang for buck. For a newbie at recording, who wont understand about monitors, mixing, preamps (where mics really start to shine), and sound proofing/isolation it makes little sense to spend more than a couple hundred bucks to start experimenting. This kit can get really expensive really fast.

So all that being said, I've setup a little experiment. I've taken 3 of my favorite mics (and one beater) set them up under the same conditions, and two at a time, recorded the same piece of text (the first paragraph of 'Under Milk Wood' by Dylan Thomas, one of my favorite plays). All mics were connected directly to my Firewire 4-10, with gain set at half for each. Mic diaphragms were set approximately 10 inches from my face. After recording I punched each track through Sound Forge 9 and boosted the volume about 300% (exactly the same for each), then mixed each down to an mp3 @ 320kbps.

The mics we'll be hearing are:

*The M-Audio Aries @ $120 - Hand held condenser mic I got for free with my soundcard.



*The M-Audio Solaris @ $300 - This was the first multi-pattern condenser I've ever purchased, and it's served me very well for years.



*The Neumann KM184 @ $700 - I inherited this mic, before I was serious about recording, from an internet news "broadcast" station I worked at briefly in college. None of us knew about phantom power, so this mic "never worked". Years later I figured it out, and this has been a great utility and over head mic.



* The Sennheiser MKH 416 @ $1400 - This is THE L.A. mic. Originally used for outdoor broadcast, it also found a home in studios thanks in part to it's laser like focus.



With introductions out of the way, let's take a listen! While listening try to keep your headphones or speakers set to the same level. Each clip is about 40 seconds long.

M-Audio Aries:


M-Audio Solaris:



Neumann KM184:



Sennheiser MKH 416:


Wow! The Aries sounds not great at all! To be fair it is meant to replace dynamic mics like the sm57 (which I originally planned on using but sounded even worse), and even though it's phantom powered, the Aries really is meant to be passed through a preamp just like the Dynamic mics it competes against.

The Senny 416 sounds great. This thing is meant to be attached to video equipment or thrown on a boom, run off batteries, and get ONE person's voice even in noisy environments. Little wonder it handily beats the living crap out of the budget "studio" mics, and at twice the price of the Neumann, it had better.

But here's where a little know-how comes in. What if we normalized the volume of the Neumann and the Solaris to match the volume of the 416? Would the Senny still sound that much better?
Let's see!

Solaris NORMALIZED:



Neumann NORMALIZED:



OK! That's much better. The Solaris comes in a little brighter. The Neumann made my voice a little muddy, but now we're much closer in terms of "quality".

Now can we really say the Senny is twice as good as the Neumann? FOUR times better than the Solaris? Or if you're just starting out do you just boost the volume after the fact with a budget mic?

Thin voice? Movie trailer voice? No one mic is going to be the best. Matching a mic to a voice is as personal as the right pair of shoes/jeans/etc. Dumping a ton of cash on a "good" mic is kind of useless unless you've got the time, money, know-how, and effort to put into the surrounding kit as well.

Let me know what you think! Comments always appreciated!
Hopefully I'll be able to do more of these as time goes on.