Poll: Which mic pair sounds better?

Addendum:
So I've gotten a couple of questions asking how to hide their responses behind a spoiler warning, figured it may be useful to have this here and in the OP: you just need to type in the text in yellow (mind the slash to close) and type what you want hidden in between.



Original Post:
Here's something just for fun. The files:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_54Jyz8xT4zuTezArciFuZASXpjGxR-V?usp=drive_link

I came across a bit of an A/B comparison hanging around some Discord server or other and figured that folk on here might either find it educational or perhaps even useful. There's a bit of background context I'll get into later because that could end up influencing perception.

These are not my files, but I did message someone backchannel who may or may not have a vested interest in the results of this poll asking for permission to share them here. The only variable is that a different mic pair was used for each recording.

Have fun!

Context:

Spoiler

The one mic pair was almost unilaterally preferred by personal audio nerds, while the other pair was much better-liked by audio engineer types. I can see the case for each, but the latter just ended up sounding much more sterile and untextured to me and lacking fine nuances relative to the mic liked by playback gear enthusiasts. That said though, I do appreciate the greater clarity of the team Engineers mic, and the greater aggression to transients; it helped things keep from devolving into near mush during busier segments.

P.S.
Would be curious to hear why you like whichever pair you end up preferring, but for the sake of keeping it fair for others please do spoiler your impressions should you feel like sharing them.

 

Spoiler

They sound pretty similar but I voted A. The difference was more obvious when summed to mono. I felt that A sounded a bit more spacious and less compressed (less smearing?), with more vibrant and delineated upper harmonics, whereas B had a bit more honk and glare especially in the lower range and the louder sections, sounding seemingly closer. If I wasn't paying very close attention, I probably would not have noticed much difference, but there surely is one.

After a bit of listening I opened up the files in REAPER to take a closer look. When I normalized them separately to 0dBFS peak, there was a peak difference of 0.09dB, with A having the higher peak level, however when normalized to RMS, there was no difference.

I couldn't see much difference on the vectorscope, but on the spectogram, I felt the difference I described was somewhat visible, with B having slightly more decay in the lower range and A having slightly more decay in the higher range relative to each other (this window is from 3:16, A is on the top, B is on the bottom):



I highlighted the areas where the differences seem the most obvious when comparing the two, though you have to look very closely to notice. Had I been using some more advanced metering software, I probably could have windowed this to be more clearly different, but regardless this was a fun way to spend 15 minutes

 

I just went by ear cuz other than foobar, REW, and Audacity I don't have anything in the way of allowing for useful visualisations of music, but I'm copy pasting my initial impressions hearing them a few days ago now:

Spoiler

Upper mids on Mic A are a bit hot with there being a bit of a cosy haze to the overall presentation, like the transient edges are rounded on it. As for Mic B, it sounds like B has better low end extension, though the upper harmonics sound thinner on B which doesn't do it any favours-- treble stings a bit on B.

Mic A sounds like a vintage recording in a good way, B does sound like it goes down more easily into the bottom octaves and plays the upper ranges more straight, but it's not as enjoyable to listen to. I guess A just sounds more analogue (whatever that means).

Oh also A just sounds more textured. Lots of subtle things that are easier to pick up on A like those slow decaying reverberations around 1:38 up until 1:51. Really feels more involved. Yeah A gets my vote. It does sound like the mic is getting overwhelmed slightly around 3 mins in with how much busier the track gets then, but it's not a bad sound.

 

So I've gotten a couple of questions asking how to hide their responses behind a spoiler warning, figured it may be useful to have this here and in the OP: you just need to type in the text in yellow (mind the slash to close) and type what you want hidden in between.

 

Impressions from a person who lurks the forum and has an account but never posts:

Spoiler

okay i listened to it like 4 times or something feels like A is the more engaging/dynamic recording, B is a flatter and more neutrally recorded track. honestly though i can barely tell, was going more on gut feel than actual listening by ear. yeah idk it was slight but A was more impactful. B didn't sound bad or anything but it was just more neutral in tone. the dynamic range of A was also greater, B sounded kinda normalized

this is me running off the modius balanced into HDVD800 into HD800

but yeah overall A was just a more "hifi" listening sound. B sounds like it's more malleable still for added processing later on. i did find that A despite being more full bodied in tone also seemed to capture some subtle bits of the music and background more too. B sounded "cleaner" (more sterile) yeah

 

Spoiler

To me, mic A sounds musical and pleasing to listen to while mic B is clean, clear, but boring. Mic B has a clearer reproduction of the piano's tone that is prioritized over the musical performance as a whole. Mic A prioritizes the musical performance as a whole.

I prefer mic A.

 

Spoiler: all the responses are spoiler really...

I'm definitely not good at this, but that is what I was picking up on. "A" just sounded a bit smoother to me overall, didn't notice the hot mids as much, but I usually only get bothered by that with vocals, especially vocal mixed hot already lol. Interesting experiment.

 

Everything being hidden behind spoilers does look a bit funny, but I'm trying to keep the responses from being swayed one way or the other unless people deliberately fish for impressions before listening on their own.

Not so much an experiment as a fun aside to prove a point. Really is intriguing cuz the results are going basically exactly like how I was thinking they would, which never happens.

On that note, tagging a few random folk just because (feel free to chime in or not): @JK47 @bazelio @rhythmdevils @loadexfa @Claritas @YMO @Serious kinda curious what you guys think.

 

Not adding a spoiler because my reasons match those stated by others, it didn't take long to form my opinion after hearing a bit of both. I did listen to the full length each time but more listening didn't change my first impression.

 

Thanks J, but now I kinda feel the pressure is on for the first to dissent haha. Kidding aside, I did specifically tag folks who I believe to have different preferences from me and different systems (VERY different systems) besides because I'm at this point wondering where the threshold for a preference inversion is.

Oh the third option that both recordings are the same is still on the table (hah)

 

Spoiler: ^-^

Listening with HD600 on my desk, so Motu M4 and Vali 1. So if my answer is wrong I'll just blame it on that and that I'm pretty exhausted tonight, lol...
Okay, something sneaky is going on. I'll say the recording and the microphones are the same, but they don't sound the same.
B sounds blurrier to me. Less sense of space, too.
There could be something going on with the phase, but I doubt it. It could be AAC compression, but I'm not so sure.
What if A is just a fraction of a dB louder? Jitter? No idea...

EDIT: As it turns out it seems I am an idiot and there was a mic difference after all? The placement of the mics must've been really close.

 

Spoiler

So, I guess I’ll be the first to cast a vote for B.

First, it doesn’t just sound like different microphones, it sounds like different microphone placement. Mic A sounds much closer, with less reverb from the room and a wider image where the lowest notes are on one wide side, and the highest are on the opposite - almost as if the mics are shoved right up near the soundboard.

Mic B, on the other hand had a narrower image of the notes, and a better balance between the piano and the room, like it’s a few feet behind Mic A. It’s possible just different mic polar patterns, or something like one being in X/Y and the other being in ORTF configurations could explain the difference.

To me, Mic B has a more “mature” sound. Wide and close is fun, and can be great in pop/rock or other modern music, but it can be really distracting in classical.

Also, Mic A makes me want to reach for an EQ immediately. Going by ear, I’d want to start pulling back frequencies in the 600hz - 2kHz area. It’s just too much, and makes the piano sound muddy and hazy.

For Mic B, I have no desire to EQ, except during the busiest and loudest passages towards the end, and to be fair, Mic A fares no better here. I also find the low end more satisfying in Mic B - there’s a little more space and presence there than on Mic A. I think that’s a positioning thing, though, and not something that EQ could fix on Mic A to make it more like Mic B.

Finally, and a matter of personal taste - I LOVE the bell-like nature of the strike of each note on Mic B. Mic A is softer, but not “wrong” in its presentation. But Mic B is just more clear and focused in a way I prefer.

Listening done on Gungnir A1 -> Monoprice Liquid Platinum -> Audeze LCD-2

Thanks @Lyander for sharing and for the spoiler instructions!

 

Spoiler

A cuz it sounds more clean, B sounded more like mud

Chain 2020 Macbook Pro --> Grado RS-2X


Is it Bushwick Bill playing the piano from his "Phantom of the Rapra" album?

 

The recordings are not from anything commercially released. The person that made em is one degree of separation off from me, but I feel like they ought know what they're doing given their background.

I'll reveal what differences there are, if any, tomorrow or the day after but I'm hoping for more impressions before then haha.

 

Oh I'm dumb. Forgot to tag @Psalmanazar and @k4rstar. Would honestly love to get your impressions if it's not too much bother. Probably forgetting more folk.

 

Spoiler

I prefer recording B, you hear more sustain and resonance. it's lost in recording A which makes it sound cleaner but sterile. I turned off recording A after 15 seconds and listened to recording B the entire way. recording A also has annoying artifacts that could be mistaken for detail but fatigue the ear.

tested on MacBook speakers

 

Spoiler

Listening to both I much prefer B.
It has more of the woody piano sound. While it might not be as detailed, it has more of the piano overtones.
A has too much of the hammer sound, while I like the sound of hammers a mix of them being more subtle is my preference.

if either had the foot pedal squeak that be my choice.
listening on my iPhone 13 mini

 

Spoiler

HD6XX from Liquid Platinum from Callia:

My quick impression was that some of A's higher notes came in a bit hotter than I'd like. I got more out of the lower notes on B, and it seemed more evenhanded, if also a bit more muted.

There's something going on with the staging, but right now I don't have the focus to fit that all together. It wasn't something I cared much about in the 10 minutes of listening.

I preferred B, but maybe that'd be different on other gear. HD6XX and LP are a whole lot less sleepy from this DAC than some others I have on hand. Maybe B would be too muted on something else, maybe A wouldn't come in as hot.

 

Spoiler

Preffed A as I feel that it has more natural decay while B seems to have slightly truncated decay