Audix OM5

40+ years in music, extensive recording & live experience. This review is for live use only - I imagine it works much better in a home studio application.

The tone quality of the two Audix OM series mics I've used OM2, OM5) is excellent, as others have pointed out. However, as with some Electro-Voice models, the Audix mics can't handle high input gain. This is another way to say they can't handle rock 'n' roll! If you ever holler into the mic, say when you're hitting that high note or when the whole band is peaking out, prepare to hear DISTORTION through the Audix products. Not only is this obviously a bad sound issue but also it puts your speakers at risk - nothing can blow speakers like a clipped signal. One of the bands I play with relies on a Bose PA and both units have been replaced twice. It finally occurred to me (after a couple audience listeners mentioned the distorted vocals) that it's the mics causing the damage. Solution? Simple: back to Shure 58's.

Been using microphones since I was around 14. So about 7 years now. I record and play live quite often and have used several microphones over the past few years.

This mic rocks! I've used almost everything from Shure including their Beta series, I've used Electro-Voice, Audio-Technica, and Peavey. This mic smokes them all! Of course the sticker is a lot higher than most mics, so the value vs. price isn't all that great, but the sound is pristine, clear, and attenuated. I can cut through a hard rock/metal band very easily with this mic, when I couldn't with an SM58.

It's a very quality mic and if you can find it at a lower price, go for it. I don't regret the $60 I spent for mine. There's a reason why bands like Pearl Jam and Smashing Pumpkins have used the Audix OM series in the past. It's professional and very low feedback. Great for on stage use and practices.

I have been playing guitar and singing for about 5 years. I have been using this mic live using a Genz Benz Shenandoh 100 acoustic amp running the mic through the 1st channel and a Gibson J-45 through the 2nd channel. I play primarily singer/songwriter, rock/folk music.

Dynamic mic with a tight Hypercardoid pattern.

I had been using a Sennheiser e835, but was not getting the clarity I was looking for through the amp. Acoustic amps are generally designed to warm the tone of the guitar. Good for the guitar, not always good for vocals. I need a mic that could deliver a clearer, more life like tone. I tried the Shure Beta, which was slightly better than the 835, but still not what I was looking for. The OM5 was a dramatic improvement. Strong clarity that cuts right through the guitar. I can see how some people struggle with the tight polar pattern, but I actually find it easier to use. Just get right up an the mic and it sounds great without the boominess you get from other mics when you are that close. Due to the tight polar pattern, feedback is nonexistent with this mic, even when I am practicing with the amp in a the bedroom. I was somewhat hesitant to buy an Audix because the brand is not as well known, but a knowledgeable performer at a reputable store assured me that most of the staff used and loved these mics. I am so glad he enlighten me to great brand and a great mic. Buy one today, you won't be sorry!

Been into music all my life. Have used the OM-5 for recording some runs in my various projects on my home PC. Usually all recording is done in a studio with lot more expensive condenser microphones, so mainly this review is about the microphone doing what it's supposed to do, live gigs.

Dynamic microphone with Hypertight-cardioid = loads of gain and minimal feedback.

Mostly in front of a band playing metal with tube amps and the usual stuff.

I tried singing to the SM58 before I bought this one but that's just crappy in all aspects, it turns my voice into pretty undecent crap, where as the OM-5 sounds clear and crisp, with a general darkness to it. Seemed to be a good one because many metalheads seem to be using the OM-5 to OM-7 microphones.

The first impression in band rehearsals was that you have to stay right on it or the sound fades away, also the singing distance has a massive effect on the sound. This means also that there is absolutely minimal feedback the brightness and gain are great.

The sound is clear and brilliant, I might go for an OM-6 or OM-7, if those would suit my singing better, I'm not totally in love with the sound but it is good.

But I have other issues with this mic witch mean I'll be testing several microphones before going there Audio technica, Sennheiser, AKG and Electro-Voice all seem cheaper and to my experience I believe they're all more reliable too.

The Audix looks like it's able to take a pounding, but instead mine broke down with normal use after two gigs and few rehearsals, didn't drop it or throw it. I can't afford buying so expensive microphones after each gig. I'd think that something in this price class would be serving you for a long time.

So come on, do some R&D on the reliability now that the sound is almost perfect.

Sound 9
Reliability 1
Overall 3

Live sound.

A friend got a couple and liked them, so I got a couple and liked them. Over the course of a few months, we independently decided that we did not like them after all - they just were irritating in a different way than the good ole SM58. (Now the OM6 was a bit different story, but when I got OM7s things finally fell into place.)

Not Long enough Yet

This is in response to this being a weak built mic, When I went looking for some thing durable the guy at the guitar center showed me the OM5 by taking it out back and bouncing it off the concrete floor a half dozen times like a basket ball. We than took it in and not only compared it to a new one for sound which there was no difference. I actually sat there and used it for awhile for vocals and was sold. That is all I have now OM5s and OM7s.

I've been playing guitar for about 10 years now. I've played in bands for the past three. I've worked with recording engineers before, and also with live sound. This review is strictly on how the mic performs live, i haven't recorded with it before.

This is one of the best dynamic mic's out there in my opinion. It has an extremely tight polor pattern so fadeing off the mic any will hurt your sound, which can be difficult when you sing and play an instrument. The payoff for this is amazing however, feedback is never a problem during gigs, assumeing you know how to run a board and an eq. I've used akg mics before, and i've run sound for a band useing sure mics before. Akg would be the only replacement for audix mics in my opinion, sure doesn't live up to the fame it has. My favorite part of this mic is the feedback control, you can crank the moniters if you need to. This wouldn't be my first choice for micing a choir, or any large group of singers, because it doesn't pick up a wide range of sounds, but that makes it perfect for playing with a band, especially if cranked guitars and drums are behind you.

I sing in a band that tours 1/2 of the year. This is my microphone. I use it for singing live. I haven't used it for recording other than scratch tracks. Its done fine there.

This Mic is perfect for me. I have had it for a few years now. You have to stay right on it - its not as workable as a 58. But you get used to that. And its a small price to pay for that amount that it doesn't feedback. This mic works very well for my tenor voice. I was having problems hearing myself live on the 58s that clubs always have. When I talked to someone about pitch problems I was having, they told me I had fine pitch, and asked what I was singing into. I said clubs always have 58s. They told me "58s are good for 2 things, low male voices and pounding nails into the stage." I sang scales in to every mic at the store, and this one just really lit up for my voice. It seems to have a bit of a boost in the high mids, which really helps my voice cut through the monitors over the rest of the guitars and drum stuff. I don't have pitch problems anymore because of this mic. I'd say its more than worth a try.

I've been involved in playing, recording, and performing music for 30 years.

I started recording my high school symphonic band's concerts with Nakamichi 300's and a nak 550 cassette. Graduated to radio (otari 5050 and otari 4 & 8track), then Record label and 2" 24 track. Also, mixed live for various Jazz, gospel and R&B/Funk bands. Now, i'm using HD24, o1x, logic, G5 dualie, and a MOTU traveler for small location stuff.

The Audix OM5's are dynamic mics with a very tight cardoid pattern.

I started using OM5's when I upgraded my church's sound system. I needed to clean up the mix with the choir. We had a shoutin' choir and the soloists were standing next to the choir , or sometimes in it. Feedback was a problem with less experienced mixers.

We switched out borads first, mackie 24.4 to a A&H 2200. The preamps on the 220 cleaned up the the sound a bit and eq allowed us to dial out stuff, but when we added the OM5's WOW. The pastor, minister of music and even the deacons notice a change.

The OM5's made the biggest change on the female soloists, the male soloist didn't have as drastic a change. No more of the proxity thing... and that took some getting used to for them.

I host and open mic an use the OM5 for my mic. I've found them to be just as battle worthy as the 58's(which I still keep on hand, and even sometimes use). I tried the OM7, but the OM5 is just a bit more flexible. It isn't for everything, and your vocalist need to stay in the pattern, unless they have very strong voices. Also, make sure you have really good preamps on your board, as you'll need to use more gain with the OM5 and the OM7's.

This is an addition to a previous post. The reliability of this microphone is wretched. I thought it felt more solid than several mics I've used in the past, but was utterly wrong. This mic broke first when it rolled off an end table. The capsule fell loose from the mount. I got it repaired for free, and I thought the problems were over. I was wrong. It has since broke two more times, and this last time, I'm just going to say screw it. I've not thrown this mic or intentionally beat it on the floor or any such thing, it has simply fallen accidentally from heights not more than 3 feet at a time, which I would say is normal for a mic, accidents happen in the real world onstage. If you plan on taking this mic out of the case and actually using it, be VERY careful. It'll sound great, certainly, just as long as it doesn't hit the floor. The sound still gets a 10, but the reliability is an utterly crappy 2 and a half.

Been playing music for 25 years. This microphone was purchased for performance so I will not discuss recording experience.

Others have outlined the features of this microphone.

I am using it for live performance in rock/pop music. Previously I was using a Shure SM-58. This microphone is far superior in terms of output level, clarity, and resistance to feedback. Others in my band are using the Sennheiser 835, and I selected this microphone instead of the Sennheiser because of reviews that I had read online. And at our rehearsal it was evident that the Audix OM-5 is comparable. It's difficult to say "better" because in a live situation, a lot gets lost under all the other sounds. I have tried the Sennheiser 835 previously, and I feel like the Audix does not require you to be quite as on top of the microphone as the Sennheiser, which is a good thing for a guitar player. I don't know if that means it's less feedback resistant, but I did not experience any feedback, so I'm pleased.

Mine was purchased on E-Bay and it came with an ART tube microphone preamplifier and a 20-foot cable, so this was a better deal for the $155 than the usual.

'recording and performing over 20 years. First analog 8 track, now DAW. KRK rokit 5 monitors, mackie board, lexicon fx, etc.

When I got this mic, I immediately A-B'd it via separate tracks with a shure SM58, also a Beta 58 (vocals and harmonica and percussion). No sane person would choose either shure over the OM5. The audix is simply clearer, more natural, and more present; the 58 sounded veiled in comparison. the Beta 58 sounded better but off-axis rejection was poor. The OM5 also has a much tighter, more uniform pattern and is seemingly feedback-proof. The superiority of the audix in this shootout was audible during playback on a car stereo and a boombox, as well.

I have been running sound since 1994. I have a mechanical engineering degree from Purdue University and have worked on a masters in acoustics. I am currently running sound for h2o church and have a good system with FOH and monitor boards using all inears and Electro-Voice X-array speakers as well as some EAW Cabinets.

I have been running sound for h2o Church for several years now and have to deal with a tearible room acoustically. I bought both the Audix OM5 and the Audio Technica ATM27 to try to eliminate front of house feedback that is caused by the nasty room. My inital impression of the OM5 was good. It sounds good and looks cool! But now that I have had it for 1 1/2 years I would never buy another one. The capsule broke loose from is mounting so I sent it back under warrenty. They called me and said that it had been dropped and it would cost me $35 to have it fixed. It may have been dropped but the other mics I have in the system have taken the same beating and they have not broken. So furious I paid the $35 and put it away as a wimpy mic and to use it as needed. Well it is broken again and I am sending it back again to make a point with Audix. I can not believe that they glue a rubber ring to a piece fo metal. If you want a Hypercardiod mic and want reliablility at a lower cost buy an Audio Technica ATM-27. You will have to deal with a proximity effect in the low end but that is easy to deal with.

I play acoustic guitar and do solo gigs. I've been a Sennheiser fan for years and own an MD-441 and a 835s. Both are great mics, the 441 for recording EVERYTHING and the 835s for my vocal when gigging. It's hot, bright and a very nice $99 mic. The 835 has been great with my voice.

I bought the audix OM-5 as I've taken on a female vocalist partner with a powerful, beautiful voice with great timbre. The 835 makes her voice sound a bit harsh and I was looking for a tighter pattern to avoid feedback.

What a great choice, very smooth. Gain before feedback is incredible and once my partner learned to stay "on it" the sound has been great.

We've recorded with this mic into my pro tools rig with great results. (I've never put my 441 on the back burner before)

Really nice mic for the money. I bought it at the urging of my pal Kurt from Full Compass. He gets a gold star for this one.

I've been singing and recording with heavier rock/metal bands for about 5-6 years now. I've had the opportunity to sing with several different mics over that time, including a variety of low-quality Peaveys, Shure sm58, 57, and beta58a. I've also had the privilege of using an Electro Voice ND767 (I think it's called), which was a superb mic. I also owned a wireless Sennheiser E835, which worked excellent for what it was intended to so.
I recently acquired this little hummer and was blown away...

The OM-5 is a hypercardioid dynamic mic, as all the OM series are. This said, it has SUPERB feedback rejection and intense gain. I used it in a tiny rehearsal room full of drums and guitar/bass amps with some reverb on my voice, and it was tight and beautiful as ever. Now, I sing, I don't scream as most metal singers do. I was classically trained and sing more like Josh Groban than say, Jonathan Davis or Corey Taylor. For my bass/baritone voice, the OM-5 sounds sweeter than any mic I've tried.
I a/b'd this mic next to the electro voice and an audio technica AE6100. Now, both of the other mics sounded great, and the AE6100 was absolutely pristine (although I did get some feedback after I got it home). Neither of them felt as bulletproof as the OM. Onstage in a metal band, you can never be sure when the moment will take you and you're going to throw the mic or drop it or step on it or hit it or whatever. The Audix feels like it would stand up to this... in fact, I'd wager it would be the last mic standing.
In my opinion, if you can stay right on top of your mic in a live setting and you're in a very loud stage setting, this is THE mic. I'm sure it would be amazing in the studio, and great for live vocalist/drummers too. I haven't used a mic with better or even comparable isolation or feedback rejection. The only other mics I would want after this would probably be the OM-6 or 7. The OM-5 is a mighty contender. If you want to step up from the SM58 or any other $100 mic, be sure you take this for a test run. Amazing.

I have been performing music for over 20 years and have spent time recording throughout the same time frame. My home recording setup consists of an M-Audio Omni I/O into a Delta 66 into my PC running SONAR 2XL. This review is more of a performance review, but you can take the qualities of the OM-5 and easlily see that this would be an effective recording tool as well.

This is a Dynamic mic that falls into he category of the Shure Beta 58. For live performance, I have in the past used the Beta 87 extensively, which is a live handheld condenser. That mic was perfect for producing high quality, studio-like vocals in a live environment. In my case, I used the mic as a part of a very high quality acoustic-solo guitar/voice PA system. However, in more recent rock, funk and R&B projects, I decided to go with the Beta 58 for some additional cut and a little more edge, which that mic provides. While the Beta 58 is a great mic, we found that it is more prone to feedback than we had thought it would be, and while it provided the power and cut we needed, it never seemed to have the sound we were looking for, which would be a little more hi-fi if you will, but not as refined as a condenser would be. After reading many reviews, I tried the Audix OM-5, and I don't think I'll ever go back to the SM/Beta mics. The OM-5 is in my opinion more "refined" than the SM/Beta series. It still cuts, but it is smoother and warm without sacraficing any definition or clarity. One of the best aspects of the OM-5 is that is seems to cut better, but more smoothly than the Beta 58. Very musical. This was particularly noticable through our in ear monitors. For live application, this mic is tremendous, but you have to stay on top of it. Tentative singers who pull away from the mic won't benefit from this mic. You have to stay absolutely on top of it, or you'll be lost. Naturally, this aspect provides incredible gain before feedback and tremendous isolation from other on-stage sound sources. I can't say enough great things about this mic. I'm sure it would perform well in recording situations and it will give engineers something different than the old standy Shures for instrument micing in the studio.