The main problem I have with the Samson -- and most of the other USB equipment I've seen recently -- is that you're limited to 16 bit samples. I prefer to work at 24 because of the extra headroom. But I don't know what your software uses; if it limits you to 16-bit samples anyway, it doesn't matter. Other than that, it looks like a good deal and would certainly make for a lot less clutter in your laptop bag.

No really, feedback is the last thing you want from a microphone...

(sorry - couldn't resist!)

I am not. I live with Phil.

I have a samson wireless lav, but it is not the greatest. My first question would be what do you want to be recording with this mic? Vocals? Drums? Wind instrument?

"Lav" is short of "lavaliere", and refers to the tiny little microphones you see attached to someone's collar on a TV interview show. They are usually wireless, incorporating a belt-attached transmitter, and a corresponding receiver back at the mixing board.

The problem with buying this particular microphone is that it's not upgradeable at all. You're limited to the quality of the mic and its associated A/D converter. Unless this mic is very expensive, I'm guessing that the A/D converter is probably not as good as the one that you already have. I can't say that for sure, because the technology keeps moving, but...

I'd be tempted to buy a better mic for the same money and throw your A/D converter (the box with the mic in / USB out) in the laptop bag for rehearsals. :)

Here's a link to a discussion of this mic's relative that doesn't include USB. They seem to think it's noisy.

With the Samson you will get the convenience of being able to plug it in directly to your laptop without a second pre-amp/convertor. However, the mic is not great quality. Again - it depends on what you want to use it for. For recording practices, and general recording tasks it will be fine. For recording tracks against someone else's studio recorded album, it will likely fall short.

Microphone purchases are difficult, mainly because there are so many types of Mic at many different price points. The key is to get the right tool for the job.

The bottom line on this is - it's fine for recording practices, sharing song ideas, things like that. I'm not sure you'll be happy with it as a primary recording mic for creating a CD. Although, if you were doing a "mic in the room" live recording, it may work.

Also, on an all-in-one USB mic, one of your limiting factors is the chip they are using to do the Analog to Digital conversion. I'm sure they are using an SOC from someone, and the SNR is generally not fantastic. This means you may find the mic noisy, and unresponsive at some frequencies. It's a trade off - convenience against quality.

If it were me, I'd buy a standard dynamic microphone - something right down the middle like a Shure SM58, and use the USB converter/preamp that you have in your kit now to run it. The SM58 is a standard, multi-purpose, do anything with it mic that you can't really go wrong with. It's nearly indestructable, and it sounds very good. http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp Yes, as the ad says, it's tuned for voice, but don't let that fool you. We use these mics for everything.

Absolutely not. I've used these mics as single "center point" mics, and as arrays and in every configuration you can think of. At one venue, they only HAD SM58's and I recorded an entire string quartet (sound track music for a production of "12th Night") using SM58's. It sounded great. They have a long sensitivity range, and a wide frequency range. If I had to ONLY have one mic, this would be the one.

The 58 is sensitive enough that I would have no problem putting one in the middle of my living room to capture all the people in the room playing, singing, whatever. Just point it up (as it's directional).

It's got great bang for the buck. Which is why it's still around and relatively unchanged after all these years.

If money were no object, I'd recommend the AKG C-451 B, with a couple of differently configured capsules. But the mic itself if around $360 USD, and it's powered. Will it give you a better sound? Yes. Is it appropriate for the described use? No. It's too expensive, and the quality is not much of a factor for rehearsal recording and song sharing.

The 57 and 58 are identical capsules. The main difference is the screen, which changes the response some. 57's are better for instrument micing, 58's generally better for voice and 2K range stuff.

Yes, the 58 does have a standard cardioid pattern - it's not Hyper, but it does have reasonable rear rejection - ideal for live performance since you can point the wrong end of the mic at the monitor and not get feedback.

Yes, it has good side rejection - but we're not talking about any kind of use where these scenarios come into play.

Put the mic low to the ground and point it at the cieling. Or, put it on a table generally facing everyone 4 or 5 feet away. (The general rule on a cardiod pattern is 1 foot away from the sound source captures three feet of the source) If you aren't right on top of it, you won't have rejection issues. In a concert, folks are right on top of the mic, where the rejection is more pronounced, so back up 3 or 4 feet, and you don't have that much of a problem.

Also - the fact that they won't be using a monitor in these scenarios means they can run the mic at a higher gain. The rejection of the cardioid pattern is good, but not perfect - so generally engineers run them at lower gain and count on the proximity effect to get them extra input and low frequency boost. If you aren't running monitors, you aren't controlled by feedback issues.

Basically, any mic with a Cardioid pattern will have about the same off-axis response. Again - I think this is complicating the issue. I don't see this as a use case as Debbie has described. The goal is to keep it less expensive at reasonable quality, and maintain ease of use.

You may be confusing it with the Shure Beta 57A/58A mics, which are supercardioid (I know, confusing that they re-used the number and stuck 'Beta' and 'A' on the end when they aren't the same response pattern). The 58s and 57s are cardioid, the main difference between them being that the 58 has a 'warmer' response for voice (but if you are recording and applying EQ later that doesn't matter much). They do have around 6dB lower sensitivity at 90 degrees (and the frequency response changes, with higher frequencies being attenuated in that direction), but not drastically.

I don't want to speak too much for Debbie - but I think we need to stick with unpowered Dynamic microphones. It's far less complicated, and has has a wider range of uses.

Of course, Debbie can tell me to shut up any time she wants. :)

Interestingly, that was tarkrai's problem the other night with the Gold Channel. :)

Nitpicking: the C-1000's do not have two capsules, but a prop-upon filter/sound guide (plastic plus insulating material) to change the characteristics.

I've not tried the Marshall large-diaphragm condenser mics (the Samson claims to be a LD condenser, but it isn't -- 19 mm is small, an inch is large), but this one might be reasonable.

I've also seen good reviews of the MXL V67G mic from someone who seems to be a reliable source. There are many of those on EBay at reasonable prices.

I seem to remember you posting, a while back, showing that you had a proper interface box for the computer, with a mic preamp. This means that you can plug any nice mic you want into the box. You don't need to settle for a dedicated-USB mic, you can pick and choose among nicer condensor microphones. And at that point you'd be paying for the mic, but not the USB circuitry, so you could potentially get more mic for your buck.

Your stated advantage is correct, though: A dedicated-USB mic like that would be very convenient if you needed to do on-the-road recording into your laptop, and you didn't want the hassle of carrying around that interface box. This, I believe is pretty much the only advantage to buying one of these dedicated USB mics.

However... consider that with the kind of recording you'd be doing in that situation (i.e., you want reference tracks for practice, not pristine studio recordings), you might not require condenser-mic quality. You might just as easily solve that problem with a dirt-cheap webcam-type microphone plugged into the laptop's 1/8" microphone jack.

(Actually, I'm not sure if Apples come with 1/8" mic jacks? Most Windows laptops do.)

Anyhoo, if you're looking for a high quality condenser mic, I'm sure there's others that would sound better in that same price range if you were just buying a mic and not the USB option.

I own the C01 which I think is quite okay. The C03 is "the same" but with pattern and high pass switch. Both are available with and without the USB interface.

I did not find the non-USB mics noisier than the other mics I have, so I think the builtin A/D-USB part probably is to blame for the noise written about in several forums. Plus you'll loose important headroom by being limited to 16bit instead of 24bit.

You already have a quite decent audio interface (24bit@96kHz, good mic preamp builtin, phantom power) - so why throw away money for a worse interface? The C01 is not the smallest microphone on this planet, so the argument that you might have to lug around "too bulky stuff" does not count here.

Additionally you might run into "reach" problems with the USB connection: the maximum line length is five meters - best. And you won't be able to use the USB mic for anything else. Ever.

Instead of the Samson C01 (http://www.samsontech.com/products/productpage.cfm?prodID=1601&brandID=2) I'd recommend from personal experience either the Behringer C-1 (http://www.behringer.com/C-1/index.cfm?lang=ENG) which is even cheaper and IMHO sounds better than the Samson (only has a 16mm diaphragm, though). That's my recommendation for the ultra-low-budget class.

Priced only a little higher (100 EUR a piece) I'd recommend the beyerdynamic MCE 530. They sound very clear and are great for recording. They are extremely small (thin as an XLR plug and barely double as long), so your M-Audio interface plus an MCE530 set won't be much bulkier than a single C01-USB. I bought a matched stereo set ~1 year ago and they have become my first choice for many of my recordings. (http://www.beyerdynamic.com/cms/Recording_studio.74.0.html?&L=1&tx_sbproductdatabase_pi1[showUid][showUID]=166&tx_sbproductdatabase_pi1[showUid][backPID]=74&cHash=a248dbba0e).

The AKG C-1000 is quite versatile featuring the possibility of running on battery and/or phantom power and being convertible between cardoid and supercardoid, but they are a little bit noisier and not sounding as clear (and twice as expensive as the MCE530).

IMHO you will probably not gain much using the USB microphone over plugging your dynamic microphone directly into the Apple mic input.

Use your M-Audio interface and choose a decent, "normal" microphone. Of the ones I own I'd recommend the beyerdynamic MCE-530 stereo set, even if they look a bit funny/lost on the mic stand compared to "real" large-diaphragm studio condensors.