Recording - August 2017 - 63

PRICE: €595, €695, €795 for configurations shown above
MORE FROM: Microtech Gefell, www.microtechgefell.de
In use: spoken word

I did actually try using the MD 300 as it was intended,
much though this may surprise the Editors who are used to my
constant misuse of products in reviews. I had a spoken word
piece being recited by a woman whose voice was in the alto
range. In this case, I liked the forward sound, but the proximity
effect made breath noises more of a problem.
This microphone has a much more modern announcer
sound than an RE20, but it has a degree of forwardness and
brightness on the vocal that even the RE27 doesn't have. It
does have enough directionality that the rustling of scripts and
sheet music below the microphone is far less noticeable than
with either of those Electro-Voice mics.
If you're going to be doing heavy limiting on voices, the
added presence will help keep good definition into the limiter
without additional processing, and the limiter will cause a lot
of that top end to disappear. That is what I was doing; I found
I had to roll a little top end off to get a good radio voice. The
artist found it nearly impossible to P-pop the microphone, even
trying very hard at close range.
I think the MD 300 would excel as a lectern mic or a panelist
mic for PA applications. The smooth off-axis response pretty
much guarantees good gain before feedback, and the finish
makes the mic innocuous-looking on camera, even if it's a bit
larger than an SM57.

Measurements

The frequency response measures out to be about what you'd
expect from my description above. There's a presence peak, not
as high and much wider than that of an SM57. There's some low
end tailoring clearly intended to compensate for proximity, which
I cannot measure well due to my equipment limitations. There is
top end response above the vocal range but it drops off fairly
quickly; it does not have the long top extension of the Sennheiser
MD 441, as is likely intentional for a vocal microphone, but of
course it has far more top end extension than an SM57. The polar
pattern is very tight and remains surprisingly uniform with frequency,
better than I have seen from most high-grade dynamic mics.
The shock mounting works very well, but because there's no
standard way to measure the effect, I can't tell you how well...
other than to say when I rap on the side with a pencil, the
peak is more than 9 dB below that of an Electro-Voice RE50
handheld dynamic mic.

"Okay, Scott, NOW you can take it apart."

The capsule design and some of the baffling in front of the
capsule at first reminded me of some AKG designs... until I noticed
that many items that would be diecast on the AKG element, are
machined on the MD 300. This adds significant precision, but
also is a far more expensive process. There is nothing too exotic
about the element or the venting; it's the same basic design that
has been used by many manufacturers over the years, just made
better with better materials and more precise manufacturing.
Everything about the manufacture seems to have been done
to a high standard. It's difficult to make a lightweight aluminum
body that is nonresonant and heavily-anodized enough that
the threads don't gall. Most higher-end manufacturers will use
brass instead, because the higher mass makes damping easier
and the threads don't fuse. Gefell instead took the aluminum
route and did it well, likely for a much higher manufacturing
cost but resulting in a lighter and more convenient microphone.
I do worry about the enormous amount of custom viscoelastic
materials in this microphone; there are large O-rings in
the internal shockmount, capsule baffling, and pop filters, all
made from rubbery materials that are apt to require some
attention as they age. This microphone is clearly designed to
last more than one lifetime, but as it does so, it will require
some attention with some precisely made rubber.

Executive summary

If you want a microphone that will pull a sound up to the
front of the mix in the same sort of way that the Neumann U
87 does, but without the pronounced top end of the U 87, the
MD 300 might be the perfect tool for you. A little bit of this
effect goes a long way; I can see it being very easy to overuse,
but used judiciously, it's a powerful tool. You may find yourself
having to roll off a little of the upper midrange and top end.
The quality of construction of this microphone is of a high
grade that I see very seldom these days; in some ways, it's
what an SM58 would be like if it were designed by insanely uncompromising German engineers who didn't care how
much it would end up costing.
If you want one mic for everything, the MD 300 isn't for
you. But if you want a mic that can work on a wide range of
singers and make them easier to fit into a dense mix, but you
want a natural vocal sound rather than a pop vocal sound,
you'll need to give this mic a try.
RECORDING August 2017

63
http://www.microtechgefell.de
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Recording - August 2017
