Recording - December 2014 - 31

Recently, however, the trend has been to tailor the microphones
back towards more classic flavors, with more even and neutral
sonics and more reined-in peaks. This is exactly where the MTR
line falls; most of the abovementioned peaks and valleys are
fairly subtle, giving both models a smooth, even fullness with a
nice forward mid punch.
In use
I put both microphones through their paces on acoustic guitar,
vocals, mono front of drum kit, stereo overheads, electric guitar
cabinets (both at a distance and shoved right up into the grille),
and for spoken word.
Even though the MTR231 makes use of a dual diaphragm versus the single diaphragm in the MTR 201, I was impressed with
how close the two sounded when the MTR231 was in cardioid
mode. It is sonically close enough that you could easily get away
with using the mismatched set as a pair of drum overheads.
On vocals, both models in cardioid exhibit a nice up-close
proximity effect with the pop filter shaving off plosives. If you
want a deeper, chestier tone, then figure-8 on the MTR231 does
the trick instantly.
I am not normally a person who likes large-diaphragm condensers right up on the grille of a guitar cabinet, but both models
excel in this application and it was my favorite use of the mic. On
drums both MTRs make decent overheads, but I preferred them on
mono front-of-kit duties, especially the MTR231 in figure-8 mode.
On sources like acoustic guitar with vocals, this mic is a touch
singer- and instrument-specific. It's best suited for times when
punch and power is needed to add centering and weight to a
mix. Again, I prefer the MTR231 in figure-8 best on vocal duties.
Interestingly, in figure-8 mode, the rear lobe is a little bit more
nasal and pinched than the front. Having different sonic signatures

on the front and rear lobes of a figure-8 microphone is nothing out
of the ordinary, but it is something to be aware of and can even be
used to advantage depending on the tone you're trying to capture.
I had less luck with omni mode on the MTR231; I'm used to
the very even response of more expensive omni mics, and found
the rolloff and slightly nasal off-axis response not to my taste.
Given how useful this mic is in cardioid and especially figure-8
modes, I don't consider this a deal-breaker at all.
Conclusions
Which model is the better choice for you? I would guess that
for many people, the cardioid-only MTR201 would be just fine
and worth the slight savings. However, if you like a low chesty
sound in your vocals or want to experiment with things like
mono front-of-kit sounds, then the MTR231 with its very useful
figure-8 pattern is probably for you.
If this is going to be the only microphone in your arsenal starting out, I found that both models "stack" quite well, meaning
they sound very good in multiple overdubs using the same mic
on every source in a recording. I would imagine they'd be great
at handling any number of duties, from songwriting sessions to
podcasting and general recording.
Samson has succeeded in bringing a new and highly affordable mic line to market with microphones that are versatile and
sound great. With their solid build and nice accessories, they
manage to avoid the me-too syndrome found in low-cost overseas
condensers, and will remain useful parts of your mic locker even
after you step up to costlier mics down the road.
Prices: MTR201, $149.99; MTR231, $199.99
More from: Samson, www.samsontech.com

http://www.samsontech.com http://www.mil-media.com http://www.mil-media.com

Recording - December 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Recording - December 2014