1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

AKG 112 vs Audix D6

Discussion in 'Recording Gear and Equipment [BG]' started by Creep, Mar 31, 2004.

  1. Creep


    Mar 12, 2004
    Well what do you all think? Which one is best for recording and or live bass amps?
  2. Josh Ryan

    Josh Ryan - that dog won't hunt, Monsignor. Supporting Member

    Mar 24, 2001
    I don't have an Audix, but I do use a 112. The 112 rocks, super high spl handling, full range, very nice. Maybe a little punchy.
  3. My answer from the amps thread.......

  4. D.A.R.K.

    D.A.R.K. Supporting Member

    Aug 20, 2003
    i have used both mics extensively in both live and recording situations.
    the good old akg offers a much warmer low mid, while the audix is very transparent in that frequency range.
    the top end of the akg is much more mellow than the audix which has a much more precise (if not sterile) type of sound.
    the results: the akg seems to take a lot less energy(gain)
    to get a useful low end in both the studio and especially live.
    a nice choice for warm round sounds. i always know what to expect from this mic(i have two at my house gig)
    the audix being so precise is nice for a cutting high end,
    great for "metal" kick drum.it is a bit of a space hog though...
    it has such a clean transient in it's low end(i believe that is a trait of most audix mics, excluding the d4) that you load down your mix unevenly trying to hear the lower frequencies.(after recieving an endorsement for my house gig, i ended up only using their vocal mics.)
    imho the akg has a much more useful character.
    in conclusion...very different mics, best suited for very different sounds.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.