Carvin CM68

I've been writing and recording music for 15 years, and running live sound for the past few years. I received the Carvin CM68 mics with a PA package. Live, we run a 16 channel Carvin mixer, to a 2000W Carvin amp. 15" mains with horns. Very basic set up.

Every time I've used the CM68s in place of my usual variety of Samson and Shure mics, I have to use DRASTIC EQ to make them "not muddy". The EQ of these mics is absolutely terrible. I'm talking cutting out the channel's low end and sweeping the mids down to 100hz and cutting those all the way back, and I still had to cut some lows from the main EQ. That really ruins these otherwise solid vocal mics. I also use the 7-piece Carvin drum mic kit and those are all very nice mics with great sound without having to do much with the EQ (boost the highs just a bit, maybe a little extra mids on the toms).

I've been playing music for 27 years. I started writing music about 18 years ago and playing and singing live about 15 years ago. I have A carvin S/L 24 board which is used for rehearsal and live shows. In-house and some live recording is done with a Tascam CD-A500 analog and transferred with pro-tools to whatever media I am using. I use 4 Carvin 1588's and two dual 18" Carvin subs all powered by 4 2000 watt Carvin amps for live S/R and a variety of in-house monitoring.

I received 2 CM68's free as part of a large purchase from Carvin. Carvin markets the CM68 as a direct competitor to the SM58. I don't own an SM58 to do A/B comparison but my current microphone of choice is the Beta 58A. I tried the CM68 out as a lead vocal mic and was not too terribly impressed. I stand mount mics as I am holding a guitar so that is the frame of reference here. I found the CM68 to be quite "muddy" compared to my Beta. We had to do quite a bit of EQing to find a reasonably acceptable sound whereas the EQ is left out with the Beta. Carvin states in their S/L mixer manual that the EQ is only included to compensate for the deficiencies of lesser quality equipment.
The build quality is good and the handling noise is nominal. I would not suggest the CM68 as a handheld stage or studio mic due to the handling noise. On stage noise rejection is decent and I have not had much of a problem with feedback.
I have relegated my 2 68's to back-up singer duty and they perform acceptably. If I was on the spot and had to, I would use one as the main vocal mic for a live performance.

I've been playing music on and off for over 20 years. Celtic, pop, rock and everything in between. Currently playing in a family band with my wife and kids.
We use the Carvin CM68 for live sound in the rehearsal room and at shows. In the rehearsal room we play back over a Behringer MX802 mixer, Carvin DCM 150 amp and Carvin SRS 6.5 studio monitors. Live shows vary.

This is a dynamic mic that directly competes with Shure's SM58. It has pretty much the same directionality pattern (cardioid), but its frequency response is closer to the Beta58 with a smoother and less pronounced hump in the high mids. Many people claim that it is sweeter than the SM58 and I have to agree.
We wanted a good quality main vocal mic at a good price, and the Carvin CM68 delivers in spades. It works great with our female lead vocalist's voice and needs almost no EQ on the PA. In fact, it subtly enhances her voice and gives it a certain roundness and clarity. It is certainly not a premier studio mic, but neither Carvin nor me would ever push it as such.
As you can tell, we are a low budget operation, but we shun low quality equipment. This mic is a great example of inexpensive high quality gear. If you are in a similar situation you should give it a try.