Cad Equitek E-200 Review

[apoczen211]

This mic was recommended to me by an instructor at my school who has had tons of experience with all kinds of mics so I figured I should check them out on the bay to see what the prices are like, well the price was right and here I am with it right next to me...First off this mic looks awesome and the switches are right there in your face not spread out like the Audio Technica mics that Im used to using. Its a big mic for being not a tube mic, the base is over 2" in diameter. Its sturdy as hell as well, it feels like I could through it out my window bounce it off my neighbors house and pic it up and use it for a session right after.(Dont plan on trying that, would suck if I proved myself wrong.) It has a -20dB pad unlike a lot of the mics Im use to using and that rocks, all the sounds from my house go bye bye with that puppy on. It is an electret condenser so it takes batteries and can be recharged with the phantom power on. It also has an on/off switch so can be charged with out it being used or on. Cosmetically and feature wise this mic is awesome in every way.
Now for the performance. I plugged it in and recorded some vocals over a track I was messing with and the first thing that popped into my head on playback was...WOW!!! This mic is flat with a nice warmth to it there really seems to be no coloring at all with it. As I have said before that I'm used to using the AT mics, mainly the 4050's and that one would be direct competition for this mic. I feel this mic comes out on top over the AT mic because it sounds warmer and tighter, though I still like the AT and it of course has its place this mic sounds awesome for male vocals. It might be to warm for acoustic guitar depending on taste but I have yet to try that.
My gripes about this mic are small but kinda dumb on the part of CAD to do this.. The mic doesnt come with a shockmount just the mount to connect it to the stand. Why would they do that? I read that it has an internal shockmount but that option should be still included being I have heard some taps from my foot when I was recording that a shockmount would have eliminated no problem. And the diameter of this mic is so big that finding a shockmount to fit is next to impossible.
In a nut shell this mic definitely out ways the cons that are pretty hefty. For under $200.00 used on ebay (Forgot to mention this mic has been discontinued for a while now,)this mic is the best buy that I have made in while, it could compete with mics that are 4 times its price..And in a review I read from a magazine about this mic it held its own with the U-87 pretty well so that should say enough.

[passerby3141]

I have one of those, and agree, it's a pretty nice mic. I ended up with a Marshall shock mount for it, barely fits, but helps. I don't use it as much as I used to, because personally I prefer a larger diaphragm when I sing. But I haven't sold it, I plan to use it more in the future, thanks for reminding me!

[oretez]

While theoretically an electret mic (e200 series) can rival their big brother DC-polarized siblings, manufacturing realities pretty much guarantee that his does not happen

rather obviously tastes vary and there is nothing 'wrong' with electret mics (I still have at least one E200). A more straight up comparison with the AT4050 is the E300. Again I'm not trashing the E200 they were better mics then they were probably intended to be and the Chinese & Russian mics probably out flanked CAD's marketing on these . . . which in my opinion is too bad (& responsibility needs to be assigned to CAD not to a knee jerk xenophobic Chinese mics are bad response)

mic opinion (not only idiosyncratically personal) is always a 'system' response: mic, room, sound source all interacting dynamically. While I have an audix electret small diameter that I prefer on mandolins, in a variety of rooms, over an AKG C460 (interestingly enough I didn't have same reaction when I tried it on violins in comparison with same 460) this is primarily because the Audix is more forgiving of mediocre rooms. In a 'proper' recording space a matched pair of C451's (or MS C414 C451) will produce a superior (based on transparency (i.e. lack of warmth imposed by mic), detail of transients, correct imaging of natural reverb tails) recording. But on some instruments, in some environments the Audix is what I reach for (not infrequently to the chagrin or surprise of people around me) [first].

While some of my perceived reaction that Audix 'works' with mando, doesn't with fiddles has to do with different projection characteristics due to design (no matter what instruments look like) . . . a more significant factor is that I have not (yet) played around with enough fiddles, rooms, days to find spots where audix provides similar response on those instruments. And that might never happen. I do far less violin recording in 'bad' rooms than I do with mandolins.

The E200 was part of a family of mics (100, 200, 300, the E350 was DC-polarized similar design to e200 came with shock mount, showed up a little later) that while the 100 was definitely the 'budget' mic the overall design approach was that each was targeted at slightly different situations. The E200 was designed with idea that capsules would be below attachment to the stand. Size of the body was designed to allow enough air between screen and diaphragm to assist in pop reduction, or for that matter spit retention. A little more then 10 yr. ago I had a brief conversation with some of the people at CAD (not actual designers of mic) concerning E series and there were reasons for 200's design that seemed plausible at the time (though I don't remember now (other then that it was intended to hang 'upside down') it is possible that with e200 CAD thought they were addressing a broadcast market). It works right side up and the CAD ZM1 shock mount will support it (if you can find one, and willing to pay for it)

If you can live with vibration issue, and depending on price and how gently it's been treated, the E200 can be a tremendous bargain. Even in vibration prone situations I've had great response from it on hand percussion (congas, djembi's, etc.). Used it effectively as a single overhead on a three mic trap setup for a 'live' session. I don't think I've put one into play during past year but that has more to do with specific projects then quality of the mic.

[apoczen211]

Thanks for all of that Oretez. That was a very intellectual way of voicing your opinion. I can see where your coming from with regards to the E-200 and broadcasting, I guess that would tie in with the flat warm sound it has. This mic to me has its place and I like it for my voice as well as the acoustic, which I finally got around to trying and it is a bit warm but with a little eq I really like its sound, and as for competing with the 4050, I did not mean exact platform electronics and all. I meant sound quality and feature wise. The comparison was made because I frequently use the 4050 at my school.