Jump to content

Audix SCX1-HC vs AKG C480B+CK63


NCSOUND
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi to you all, first post here. I'm a sound mixer based in barcelona, spain. I'm looking for an interior boom mic, i have read a lot of discussions here about hyper and super cardioids mics, i know that a lot of people loves their CMC641 and MKH50 (mkh 8040 and 8050 also), but unfortunately they are out of my budget. People allways recommend on a low budget this two mics the audix and the akg. Here in barcelona it's impossible to rent them and make a side by side comparison, so i would like to know if any of you have used boths and know your reviews as well. 

I like that the akg have a +6, 0, -10 db pad, and also a bass cut filter: 12 db/octave at 70hz and 150hz.

 

Thanks to you all, 

regards from barcelona, spain.

Nico

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real difference (I mean the one that matters) between those first two microphones you mentioned is not about the sound quality but that one is an RF condenser design (MKH series) and the other is an AF condenser design. The MKH 50, therefore, is more likely to keep working in moist environments. With that said, I don't know enough about whether the Audix or the AKG are more likely to sputter due to moisture. 

 

Looking it up, the AKG model you mention seems quite expensive.... You could get the MKH series with that much money. When I first saw AKG and Audix in the title I initially thought you'd be referring to the AKG Blue Line series which is of comparable price to the Audix SCX1-HC. I believe the Audix sounds better than this series, however (according to Ty Ford), though I have heard the Blue Line series is generally resistant to humidity. 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AKG C480 (& older C460) w/ CK63 combo is one of the most underrated mics on this board. Extremely low noise, absolutely great sound, sounds as good if not better than the Schoeps CMC641 combo. The two-stage on board low-cut is invaluable for production work. I've never used the Audix, but I would point out that the AKG is twice its price (over $1000).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used the AKG C480/460's for years and really like them, they also come up for very reasonable prices second hand.  I haven't tried the Audix but the CK63's a true hypercardioid rather than a hyper/super like the MKH50 and Schoeps meaning it's a wider directivity pattern, but gets less room sound.  Sounds great and low noise (less than the Schoeps, almost as good as MKH50) though, reason I haven't bought an MKH50 or Schoeps.  There's also a (discontinued :( ) swivel joint for the series

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used the AKG C480/460's for years and really like them, they also come up for very reasonable prices second hand.  I haven't tried the Audix but the CK63's a true hypercardioid rather than a hyper/super like the MKH50 and Schoeps meaning it's a wider directivity pattern, but gets less room sound.  Sounds great and low noise (less than the Schoeps, almost as good as MKH50) though, reason I haven't bought an MKH50 or Schoeps.  There's also a (discontinued :( ) swivel joint for the series

Hi Richard thanks for your anwser. I found in this web (http://www.microphonesforless.com/product/OS-A61) the swivel joint that you mention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the two mic's being compared are in different price class (and value)...

Audix mic's are a great value,  and AKG's are great mic's.

 

Senator here in europe the price difference is only 184 €!! Akg c480b+ck63=698€ vs audix scx1-hc=514€...

In the states the price difference is 461€...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to correct what might become a misimpression: while AKG's Blueline mics are very good electret, the C480 series are high-voltage externally polarized condensers. A lot less self-noise. Both have very good acoustic/mechanical design, though the C480 seems made to tighter tolerances.

 

(The C4xx will run on 9v as well as P48, but that's not because they're electret. The voltage is chopped at and stepped up within the preamp, and a high voltage goes to the capsule.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Audix SCX 1 HC is not being made bei MBHO in Germany. They work together but MBHO is not producing this mic. The Preamps and capsules they sell are a bit more expensive than the Audix.


I compared specs and Polar Patterns to see what I can get:


Pattern
Sennheiser MKH 50 - tightest +++
Schoeps MK41 - second, small rear lobe +++
Audix - SCK 1 HC - close second (Hard to say as freq's aren't lined up to 0 on polar pattern) ++
Sennheiser MKh 8050 - a bit wider - largest rear lobe +
AKG C480 CK63 - widest - smallest rear lobe ++

 


Sensity / noise
AKG C480 CK63 - 40mV/pa 13 dB A ///or/// 20mV/pa 11 dB A ++++
MKH 50 - 25mv/pa 12 dB A +++
MKH 8050 - 20mv/pa 13 dB A ++
SCX 1 HC - 15mV/pa 14 dB A ++
Schoeps Mk41 14mV/pa 15db A ++ 

 


Frequency Plot
MK 41 - flaaaat ++++
MKH 50 - flat + gentle presence boost +++
MKH 8050 - flat + lots of bass +++
AKG CK 63 - flat + little dip 6000-11000Hz ++
SCX 1 HC - bumpy / boost around 2000Hz lots of bass +


As of the specs and NOT EXPERIENCE
I would summ up - if you need a indoor mic to cover several people - go for AKG
If you need a mic for quiet situations - go for AKG or MKH 50
If you want small pattern - go for Audix or MKH 50 or MK 41
If you want deep Bass go for MKH 8050 
if you want to sound everything natural MK 41 or MKH 8050


What all this not considers is the offaxis sound and how dynamic a mic sounds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Audix SCX 1 HC is not being made bei MBHO in Germany. They work together but MBHO is not producing this mic. The Preamps and capsules they sell are a bit more expensive than the Audix.

I compared specs and Polar Patterns to see what I can get:

Pattern

Sennheiser MKH 50 - tightest +++

Schoeps MK41 - second, small rear lobe +++

Audix - SCK 1 HC - close second (Hard to say as freq's aren't lined up to 0 on polar pattern) ++

Sennheiser MKh 8050 - a bit wider - largest rear lobe +

AKG C480 CK63 - widest - smallest rear lobe ++

 

Sensity / noise

AKG C480 CK63 - 40mV/pa 13 dB A ///or/// 20mV/pa 11 dB A ++++

MKH 50 - 25mv/pa 12 dB A +++

MKH 8050 - 20mv/pa 13 dB A ++

SCX 1 HC - 15mV/pa 14 dB A ++

Schoeps Mk41 14mV/pa 15db A ++ 

 

Frequency Plot

MK 41 - flaaaat ++++

MKH 50 - flat + gentle presence boost +++

MKH 8050 - flat + lots of bass +++

AKG CK 63 - flat + little dip 6000-11000Hz ++

SCX 1 HC - bumpy / boost around 2000Hz lots of bass +

As of the specs and NOT EXPERIENCE

I would summ up - if you need a indoor mic to cover several people - go for AKG

If you need a mic for quiet situations - go for AKG or MKH 50

If you want small pattern - go for Audix or MKH 50 or MK 41

If you want deep Bass go for MKH 8050 

if you want to sound everything natural MK 41 or MKH 8050

What all this not considers is the offaxis sound and how dynamic a mic sounds

great post!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Mictests including AKG ck 63 and CK 93 

 

http://www.dvfreelancer.com/articles/audio/shotgunShootout.html#SennheiserMKH50


 

but CK 93 is at 17dbA and 10mV/pa too noisy / not sensitive enough for me. 

Also the Oktava MK 012 with 18dbA and 10mV/pa 

 

I am not sure if every manufacture does measure exactly the same but for reference:

 

a MKH 416 is 13 dbA at 25mV/pa 

a Schoeps CMIT is 14 dbA at 17mV/pa

a Sanken CS-3 is 15 dbA at 50mV/pa

a AKG CK 69 is 9 dbA at 27mV/pa

a Sennheiser MKH 70 is 5 dbA at 50 mv/pa

 

I would buy no mic worse than the MK 41 in terms of sensity / noise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...