![Mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro](https://kumkoniak.com/63.jpg)
![mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro](https://www.gamerheadset.net/sites/gamerheadset.net/files/test-galeriebilder/mxl-2006-und-behringer-b2-pro-0003.jpg)
![mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro](https://file.hstatic.net/1000356871/article/maxresdefault__5__08cd57c083114c6bb44b5df599b3e632.jpg)
But 1 reviewer sold me who was a long time professional recording engineer who also has several high end mics (Neumann etc.) and stated that The B2 Pro was incredible for the price and he felt it would match up with mics $400 -> $1000 range. I just recently purchased the Behringer B2 Pro !!!) large condenser mic after reading tons of reviews good/bad. In most cases, I have found that actual measured response is often far worse than the factory response chart illustrates(usually very heavily smoothed, and sometimes, peaks are not shown that actually exist). Note: Do not assume factory response plots are represenative of actual response. I don't know of any mic comparable to the B5 for less than many hundreds of dollars - though that does not mean it does not exist a comparable unit for the same or less - I just have not come across it yet. This is a serious quality mic for a penny pincher price, based on actual measured performance. The B5 can withstand substial SPL before it clips. The B5 can easily be used as a reference grade mic, if accuracy/neutrality is your objective. Noise performance is good on the C4, and even better on the B5. Due to the broad nature, it will rather audible, as compared to the narrow peaks on the B-5. The C4 has up to 3dB semi-broad peak in the mid treble band. The omni capsule is also flatter response, about +/- 1.5dB, from 50Hz-15kHz, on the B-5, with two narrow peaks, one about 1.5dB and the other about 2dB in magnitude, in the mid-treble.
![mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro](https://medias.audiofanzine.com/images/normal/behringer-ultralink-pro-mx882-691829.jpg)
The C4 has substantial, wide 5 dB peak in the treble with the cardoid, while the B-5's cardoid is relatively flat, within a couple of dBs, through the entire bandwidth. The B-5 has a flatter response, with both the omni and cardoid capsules. The B-5 has better machine work(C4 has sloppier threads, edges, etc.). I have inspected/analyzed/measured both microphones under heavily controlled conditions. But I have the answer to the thread if anyone wants to know the truth. I take it that raising the ceiling is out of You considered a pair of omnis? The AT4051 also is a pretty good cardioid The wide pattern works better for me on drum >The main reason I'll put up a MXL-603s sometimes is because of the wide cardiod I don't use them and probably should sell them. >couple of MXL-63M's (Mars) cheap and the electronics in them were similiar to >I did mod my MXL-V67G and that was an improvement. Problems that I decided it wasn't worth spending a lot of time on the I have not done the SDs at all, mostly because they have enough capsule >when he was with Marshall and he cleaned them up (noise) and sent me back a >Did you do the Dorsey Mods on the MXL603?
![Mxl 990 vs behringer b2 pro](https://kumkoniak.com/63.jpg)