Recording - February 2021 - 57

dynamic ranges. Still, it should go without saying that specs don't tell the full
story. The real test is done with our ears
in the studio, not analyzing numbers
and graphs.

In Session

I started by recording acoustic guitar
and vocals. Generally speaking, both
mics conveyed a natural musicality with
a much less colored sound than I was
expecting. The MK-115 is a bit rounder
by comparison, with a thicker low-mid
emphasis and a darker top end. The
MK-117 is a bit more mid-forward, especially in the upper midrange. You might
be thinking an upper midrange emphasis
can translate to a brittle or harsh sound,
but in this case, it did not. It sounded detailed and polite while effectively cutting
through a mix. The 2 kHz emphasis is noticeable and helps shape the sound, but
the added energy doesn't extend high
enough to sound overly sibilant or bright.
It does have a pleasant, airy, natural and
open quality-more so than the MK-115.
These two mics paired nicely as an
A/B mismatched spaced pair on acoustic

guitar. I placed the MK-117 in the standard position between the 12th and 15th
fret, with the warmer MK-115 capturing
the body. The tonality difference of the
mics made for a wide stereo image with
a natural sound that leaned slightly to
the warmer side of the spectrum. For
mono recording, I think I'd grab the
MK-115 first for most acoustic guitars;
its rounded top end and rich low-midrange character provides a nice fullness
without sacrificing too much clarity up
top. That being said, the MK-117 is a
great choice as well, with more attack
and clarity in the top end. Either mic is
suitable in that role, depending on the
genre and tone of the guitar.
Both mics are viable options on vocals, though the MK-117 might be
suitable on a broader range of vocalists; the top end is a bit more open and
inviting. Like I mentioned earlier, the
2 kHz-4 kHz range is emphasized, but
it's not in your face-it's just enough to
sit comfortably in a mix without much effort in post, and it achieves a convincing
and natural sound in the process. The
MK-115 sounds a bit thicker on vocals-

really cool in the right context. It's not as
warm or vibey as sticking a ribbon mic
in front of the vocalist, but it tames sibilance nicely and with smooth midrange.
Vocalists seem always to enjoy singing
into unique looking microphones, and
either of these mics checks that box.
Percussion translates very musically
as well. Based on my experience with
various hand percussion, I think that a
MK-115 pair would make great overheads, or singly as a front-of-kit mic.

Conclusion

Oktava builds on its rich heritage.
Both of these mics are built to last, with
a respectable sound to match on a
range of sources. The midrange and top
end detail of the MK-117 make it a bit
more of a general workhorse, while the
MK-115 is more sculpted, with a lowmid emphasis and a warmer top end. I'd
have a hard time choosing one over the
other, as both microphones lend themselves to distinct uses.
Price: MK-115 $498; MK-117 $529
More from: en.oktavatula.ru

http://en.oktavatula.ru https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/recording-the-podcast-for-the-recording-musician/id1544530573?itsct=podcast_box&itscg=30200 https://www.recordingmag.com/podcast/ https://open.spotify.com/episode/7iiSCAtmSVxpnhRF85ZkVb

Recording - February 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Recording - February 2021