Recording - June 2012 - 55

As far as comparisons to my own mic closet go, I would say that the DC-96C reminded me a lot of my Brauner Phantom and gave it a run for its money, and that is not a statement I make often. These are both workhorse mics of the highest order, but due to their sonic differences there are areas where one may be better suited to a source than the other. For drum overheads, for pure clarity and detail, I would choose the DC-96C, and as such I loved it as a ride mic. For the most part, however, I preferred the DC-96B for general overhead duties; it was clear and honest, but still had that nice rounding and smooth mids I mentioned above. The DC-96B is one of the most balanced overhead or, better yet, mono front-of-kit mics I have heard, and gave me one of the rare times I will say “needed little to no eq” when mixed in with the rest of the drum mics. The DC-96B is an awesome snare mic as well, capturing less of a mid punch than the usual SM57 but more crack and overall fullness. In a jazz situation, with a lighter, more nuanced player, the DC-96C is also a good snare mic choice, especially when you have a drummer who plays to and with the sound of the drum. The two mics really make a killer combo with the DC-96B on top and the DC-96C grabbing the underside snare rattle. On acoustic instruments, both mics excel. On acoustic guitar the DC-96B is tad more midrangy and woody, while the DC96C is just a touch more suited to string definition, and here it’s really nice when you want to highlight the room and space around the guitar as well. On violin, with a nice instrument and a great player, about 1 foot from the f-hole is where I really felt the DC-96C gave my Phantom a run for its money, with great clarity and detail, while ignoring too much woof on the body. It worked similarly well as a single mic in the middle and in front of a string trio, with 2 violins and a cello. Moving to vocals, starting with a female soprano, here I could go either way as it is more an issue of taste. The DC-96B was

more solid, while the DC-96C had a nice airy intimacy, its only detriment (and something we don’t often think about) being that if mouth noises like spittle-clicks are an issue, choose the smoother response of the DC-96B. On electric guitar they both worked well together. I placed the DC-96B on axis about 1” from the grill of a 12” Mesa Boogie cabinet next to a standard SM-7, and placed the DC-96C about 4’ back as a distance mic. Once blended into the mix it yielded a huge yet open and detailed blues rock tone. I also evaluated both mics on mandolin, shaker, tambourine, and a set of congas, and for each it was a tossup depending on where I wanted things to sit in the mix and musical style. Ultimately it always came down to where I needed the high-end to sit. For more natural and smooth I chose the DC-96B; for more detailed and open the DC-96C, whose slight low bump didn’t hurt either. Conclusions I had heard of Milab and was glad to finally get my hands on some of their mics. There are a lot of great mics out there, and as a reviewer I have had the opportunity to play with a lot of them over the years. Every now and then a mic crosses my path that really turns my head and frankly blows me away. The DC96B and C are just such mics... just scary good on everything. They’re alike in many ways but with subtle differences that make it impossible to choose a favorite... At first I think the DC96B wins, but maybe I am romanticizing its vintage classic touch... ah, heck, I’m sure I am, but as soon as I say that I second-guess myself that maybe it’s better to have the extra clarity of the DC-96C... darn it, go try them yourself! Prices: DC-96B and DC-96C, $1470.95 each (MAP) More from: Milab, www.milabmic.com

http://www.milabmic.com http://www.facebook.com/pages/RecordingMag/174861759224348 http://www.twitter.com/recordingmag http://www.realtraps.com

Recording - June 2012

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Recording - June 2012