CAD Microphones

[almostmatt1]

Any good? Pretty cheap but that leads me to wonder of their quality... Anyone have any experience?

[itchie]

they have a emphasis on cheap affordability not quality ....the build quality is ok but they just don't have the dynamic range for recording

4/10 ...they get the job done

[longgun]

Any good? Pretty cheap but that leads me to wonder of their quality... Anyone have any experience?

...I don't remember which thread, but there was a guy one here that recorded with a set of CADs and it sounded awesome......I'm sure it's like anything else...if you know what you are doing, you can make it work.

Buddy Rich would have sounded great on a Percussion Plus Set.

[DrumRookie]

CAD's are ok, you can hear a lot of sound clips on youtube of people using them.
But they do seem a bit weak in the dynamic range as itchie said.
Most of the clips I heard when I was researching to buy a pack of them sounded like the kick was kind of weak in the low end.
But it's best to judge for yourself with the sound clips and so on.

Good luck!

[trickg]

I picked up a 7 pc set of CAD drum mics because the price was right. Of those 7 mics, I really only use the 3 tom mics. An SM57 is better for snare than theirs, and the bass drum mic is pretty lackluster - I'm using a Shure SM7B because it's what I happen to have, and it's way better. I also use a set of Audix Fusion 15 condensers for overheads.

Having said all of that, they'd be more than adequate to use in most live situations, and any recording situation where you were doing demo stuff or scratch tracks. The issue then would be durability - how much use would you get out of them before one more more of them broke?

[Russ]

They make an okay mic kit for the starting beginner in miking and recording. You will be challenged into learning how to get a good sound with them though, so be prepared to do a bit of fiddling around with the settings first. They aren't terribly expensive, which is their main draw. When I was choosing my mics, I ended up choosing Samsons and MXL's for overheads because I liked the sounds I heard and it seemed like a better deal for the money. As i'm sure you can imagine, in the right hands CAD's will surprise you soundwise.

[Digital]

I listened to a whole bunch of youtube videos of CAD mic setups through my home theater system, and out of maybe 15 videos, only one sounded decent to me. They're cheap, but the sound reflects it, in my opinion.

The Audix mics sound amazing for the price.

[funkyruss]

Yup, i have them as well, fine for a live situation, but if you're recording, you'll need something real. I also have another kick and snare mic to use when i need something better. I have hit them a few times with stray drumsticks, they still work, fyi..

[trickg]

The Audix mics sound amazing for the price.

Are you talking about the Audix Fusion series of mics, or their standard drum mics? The standard setup (D1s, D2s, D4s, D6, etc) are fantastic drum mics, but I've heard awesome things about the Fusion series mics. The only ones I have out of either lineup are the two F15 condensers, and they exude quality, even at that price point.

[DWdrumr]

I own the CAD Touring7 Set, this is there top-of-the-line set, and to be honest I absolutely love them. Very well built, very clean sound, I would recommend them anyday.

[trickg]

Dude, that sounds really nice. What always gets me are the audio snobs who hear with their eyes - I mean really? Can a person really tell that big of a difference once a certain quality threshold is passed?

[itchie]

What always gets me are the audio snobs who hear with their eyes

what the ?

do you really think we would do that?

[Northern Redneck]

what the ?

do you really think we would do that?

Yep

[itchie]

oh hi NR

[trickg]

What always gets me are the audio snobs who hear with their eyes...

what the ?

do you really think we would do that?

Maybe not you, but there are definitely people who do. I know this guy who is REALLY into recording and in the conversations we had he talked a lot about various microphones, preamps and other studio toys he had acquired here and there, some of it quite expensive - he has a job and salary that allows him to play a bit more than others when it comes to that kind of thing.

I mostly knew this guy through an internet forum, but we live close enough that we actually got together once to talk about horns and stuff - we are both trumpet players. He gave me an album that he recorded with his bandmates. Dude, it was laughably bad. I mean, it was so bad that at times I wondered if it wasn't put together as a joke. Granted, it was a collection of musician friends doing a lot of original material, but it was a fully produced CD, complete with cover art and shrink wrap - it wasn't a joke, it was a project they put together in a very serious way.

My point is that for all of those expensive studio toys, for no better than it was recorded and produced, they just as well have recorded the entire thing, vocals and all, with that CAD drum mic set. Good gear will never compensate for poor technique, but conversely, good technique can make even mediocre gear sound pretty good.

This goes along with the idea that some of Madonna's and Bono's vocals that made it onto the finished song were recorded with an SM57 and 58, respectively - platinum selling records where the vocals were recorded with what even now is only a $100 microphone.

[nucjd]

Dude, that sounds really nice. What always gets me are the audio snobs who hear with their eyes - I mean really? Can a person really tell that big of a difference once a certain quality threshold is passed?

I had to think about your response for while to get what you are saying. If you mean audio snobs= musicians who want to see certain pieces of gear in a studio, then yes i agree with you on this. A lot of recording for musicians is perception. They want to see a big board and wall of rack gear and neuman mics in the mic locker.

edit: after the follow up post itchie i think he is talking about me

[nucjd]

Maybe not you, but there are definitely people who do. I know this guy who is REALLY into recording and in the conversations we had he talked a lot about various microphones, preamps and other studio toys he had acquired here and there, some of it quite expensive - he has a job and salary that allows him to play a bit more than others when it comes to that kind of thing.

I mostly knew this guy through an internet forum, but we live close enough that we actually got together once to talk about horns and stuff - we are both trumpet players. He gave me an album that he recorded with his bandmates. Dude, it was laughably bad. I mean, it was so bad that at times I wondered if it wasn't put together as a joke. Granted, it was a collection of musician friends doing a lot of original material, but it was a fully produced CD, complete with cover art and shrink wrap - it wasn't a joke, it was a project they put together in a very serious way.

My point is that for all of those expensive studio toys, for no better than it was recorded and produced, they just as well have recorded the entire thing, vocals and all, with that CAD drum mic set. Good gear will never compensate for poor technique, but conversely, good technique can make even mediocre gear sound pretty good.

This goes along with the idea that some of Madonna's and Bono's vocals that made it onto the finished song were recorded with an SM57 and 58, respectively - platinum selling records where the vocals were recorded with what even now is only a $100 microphone.

Those SM57 and 58 mics were running into 5000 to 8000 preamps which then ran to tape an then was converted by some of the most expensive converters then went to a mastering house where another 100,000 worth of gear was utilized. So it is not just the mics it is the whole pathway with a good recording environment and finally a good engineer.

[DWdrumr]

*sorry Kevin, but the Forum Rules prohibit links to commercial sites. - PB[/QUOTE]

Oop's, sorry PB!

[DWdrumr]

Dude, that sounds really nice. What always gets me are the audio snobs who hear with their eyes - I mean really? Can a person really tell that big of a difference once a certain quality threshold is passed?

I agree. The top mics are great of course, but your paying an arm and leg for them. I feel I achieved a very high quality sound, with my mics, and am very happy with them, and frankly that is all that should matter. There great mics.

[trickg]

Those SM57 and 58 mics were running into 5000 to 8000 preamps which then ran to tape an then was converted by some of the most expensive converters then went to a mastering house where another 100,000 worth of gear was utilized. So it is not just the mics it is the whole pathway with a good recording environment and finally a good engineer.

I see your point there, but the sound signal itself originates with the mic, and the right people were able to make it good. In the case of Madonna, they were demo tracks recorded in the producer/engineer's appartment, so they may not have been going through really high end preamps. The article did go on to say that they had to process it a bit to clean it up, but the point that was made was that the mic itself got the job done, and that superior technique took care of the rest. I'll have to see if I can find that article to see what preamp was used for those recordings.

Bringing this back to the discussion regarding the CAD mics, in the right environment with the right people running the sound or recording, they'd probably get the job done ok - with the wrong environment and the wrong people running things, even great mics are going to sound pretty bad. To add to that just a bit, there comes a point of diminishing returns with gear sometimes. I'm a fan of nice stuff, but for me there comes a point where the gear outmatches my ability to properly use it! Haha! (Which is just about everything I own in drum gear and recording gear.)

[MR. G]

assuming everybody's hearing is different ( I don't have the CAD's, by the way) then the way they hear things, too must be different...I have found through the years that what sounded good to me was evidenced when I reviewed the respective spec sheet. It's no secret certain frequencies are inaudible, but when I compared the sounds I liked with the specs.....they always had one thing in common...good sound correlated with good specs. One example is, let's say the human ear ( on average ) can only hear up to 17,000 Hz....but the equipment is capable of producing 22,000 Hz. In the end, the overall sound is just that much cleaner. Another ( better ) example is single versus triple digit distortion....this and other " good " specs do make a difference in the sound you hear or can't hear----- since the air is still moving ! Even to the untrained ear.

[Digital]

[/QUOTE]

From all the CAD recordings I've heard so far, yours is by far the best. I might have considered them had I heard that before buying the Audix mics. I don't regret my purchase though.

[Digital]

Are you talking about the Audix Fusion series of mics, or their standard drum mics? The standard setup (D1s, D2s, D4s, D6, etc) are fantastic drum mics, but I've heard awesome things about the Fusion series mics. The only ones I have out of either lineup are the two F15 condensers, and they exude quality, even at that price point.

I own the D series and the ADX51 consenders.

[s_tic_k]

this is a good example for ya http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LWqjTMlJD0