What is your main Vocal mic

[fabtranzer]

Originally posted by wonder:
but im sure its running through about 20k worth of outboard gear before it hits tape

Yes of course , and so does a Neumann or any type of more expensive mics in this level of production.
Get rid of the 20k outboard gear and the SM 57 still compares in the same interesting way to other more common vocal mics.

[wonder]

i beg to differ...BIG TIME

[BradLyons]

I respectfully disagree.... the first point of contact that any instrument or voice has in the recording chain is the microphone, the CAPSULE. Dynamic microphones produce sound by a coil heating up, a condenser has a backplate electric where a ribbon is well...a ribbon. Okay, it's far more technical than this but a Dynamic microphone can never be as smoothe or responsive as a Condenser or Ribbon design. Good high-end gear can and does have an impact on the tone of the sound, but that gear can only work with the signal being fed to it.

I have a very high-end monitoring setup using high-end converters, highly professional monitors, and a finely-tuned room..... there is absolutely a significant difference between an SM57 and high-end mics in the studio.

[fabtranzer]

Guys , don t get me wrong :

Of course there s a HUGE difference between a Sm 57 and a condenser mic !
What I am saying is that one is not necessarily better that the other, it s all a matter of taste and artistic choice.

In some situations the SM 57 will be great !

I just wanted to state that on this forum as the 57 doesn t come to mind naturally when it comes to vocal mics

Fab

[BradLyons]

Well, I could charge you $3,000 for an SM57 and then we'll, I mean I will, have the best of both worlds! hehehe

[chrispick]

Originally posted by Fab Tranzer:
Guys , don t get me wrong :

Of course there s a HUGE difference between a Sm 57 and a condenser mic !
What I am saying is that one is not necessarily better that the other, it s all a matter of taste and artistic choice.

In some situations the SM 57 will be great !

I just wanted to state that on this forum as the 57 doesn t come to mind naturally when it comes to vocal mics

Fab

I got what you were saying; it was clear.

And you're right. It all depends on the application and its context. Surely, an SM 57 is going to better suit a punk or metal singer than a Royer ribbon mic.

I'm just now getting into owning a vocal mic. I got a Rode NTK. Is it the perfect mic for every voice and every genre? Hardly. Does it work well for me and what I do? Absolutely.

<small>[ July 05, 2005, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: heavypick ]</small>

[m2]

As VOCAL mics go it's easy to make a distinction between a condenser mic and a SM57. The 57 is a great workhorse of a mic but it's probably not the first call for a good vocal mic. Bottom of a snare. In front of a marshall or a Fender Vibrolux. Sure.

I just ended the day doing a vocal session with an M149 into a Great River Mic pre to a Manley VariMU Comp into the DAW. I'm not sure I could use a 57 and even begin to have gotten close to the recording a have. I'm going home.

[wonder]

if opinions mattered, i'd venture to say that about 98% of all on here would never choose a 57 on their vocals over a RIBBON or CONDENSER/TUBE/MEGA EXPENSIVE MIC.

[chrispick]

Originally posted by wonder:
if opinions mattered, i'd venture to say that about 98% of all on here would never choose a 57 on their vocals over a RIBBON or CONDENSER/TUBE/MEGA EXPENSIVE MIC.

Well, what else are we talking about here but opinions?

I think it's definitely worth weighing in that we're considering vocal mics without considering the type of voice, the style of vocal and the music's genre -- all of which can affect a mic choice dramatically.

I don't use an SM57 for my singing voice; my voice is way too wussy. I need a strong-ass diaphragm to make up for my weak-ass one.

But other people use it.

From a Sound on Sound article about Rick Rubin and the Chili Peppers...

"Anthony (Kiedis) always used an SM57 for his lead vocals. We put it on a stand, but I'm sure he held it in his hand, and leant on it and swallowed it. That's how he gets his sound, but it meant that it was important to compress him, in order to protect the tape...Over the years I have discovered that you gain little from auditioning 25 microphones, when you have a good sound. Just record the good sound and get it over with. It's not recording school every day - it's more important to get these ideas down while they're hot."

He goes on to say that the rest of the band's vocals were usually recorded with a U87. My guess is it's because they didn't yell nearly as much. But doesn't that speak to the idea of context and application?

I guess it's also worth noting that 57s are used for spoken vocals (although, admittedly, that's not not really what we're talking about) on lecterns all the time.

Most audio recommendations are rules-of-thumb, not etched-in-stone law. Eschew the dogma.

<small>[ July 06, 2005, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: heavypick ]</small>

[supa frost]

Originally posted by m2:

posted June 17, 2005 12:22 PM

So ... is it possible to JUST use an 1176 without a PREAMP before it? once again, dont laugh....

Wouldn't laugh at anyone trying to get right. Engineering is certainly my SECOND gig. You have to have some sort of pre if only at the board to get mic level enough gain to be worth a damn. I never tried it but I guess the 1176 could be used as the pre amp but I would think the levels would be too wierd to control. You would have to crank it just for the sake of gain and thus would NOT be using it as an effective compressor. I don't know I never tried that! LOL You may be inventing the next cool sound for vocal recording!

I have an M149, 737sp and an 1176. I recently did an A/B on the vocal chain. The results were as follows:
M149-->Avalon737--->1176--->DAW.
The sound was too gritty for my taste. Tube mic and tube mic pre, not a good combo IMHO.
M149--->1176--->DAW.
The sound was much more smooth espcially on the top end.
Although I prefer the latter, both setups can serve a purpose depending on what kind of sound you are going for.
So finally, is it possible? Definitely Yes!

[qo]

Originally posted by Brad Lyons:
I respectfully disagree.... the first point of contact that any instrument or voice has in the recording chain is the microphone, the CAPSULE. Dynamic microphones produce sound by a coil heating up

Actually, it produces sound in the same way a speaker does. By a coil moving within a magnetic field to produce electricity. Whether or not it heats up in the process is irrelevant.

, a condenser has a backplate electric where a ribbon is well...a ribbon. Okay, it's far more technical than this but a Dynamic microphone can never be as smoothe or responsive as a Condenser or Ribbon design.

A condenser operates by taking advantage of varying capacitance between the diaphragm (which is attached to a moving conducting plate) and a fixed conducting plate. A fixed charge is applied across these plates (hence the need for phantom power) and when the diaphragm moves, the interplate capacitance changes, altering the current. Ribbons work in the same way as dynamic mics except that the ribbon replaces the coil.

As for which is smoother, I guess it depends on what "smooth" means. I think it's good to clarify terms since it sounds like people are talking past each other. If "smooth" means "without transients" then dynamic mics will, largely, be smoother than condensers (and large diaphragm condensers smoother than small diaphragm condensers) since dynamic mics tend to "compress" transients given that they are physically less able to track them i.e. the weight of the coil comes into play (which explains why SM57's seem to gravitate to snare drums in studio settings). If by "smooth" we mean "sounds smooth" then we're back to having to all agree on what "sounds smooth" means.

[wonder]

Just used an AKG C12 on vocals. GRRREAT!

[duncan]

comparing a new Rode NT2A ($400 street) with a used AKG 414 ($1K new or $700 used) and an AT 4050 and AT 4047 (both around $500) I have come up with the following conclusions, based on my midrangey baritone voice, singing about 6 inches away through an FMR preamp:

If the NT2A is butterey and rich
the 414 is really beefy (less so with the lo cut engaged,) with sizzle
the 4050 is a little honky, with definition
the 4047 is thin with a harsh top end. the 4047 does have decent lo end, but the brite factor seems to thin out the sound.

I didn't even bother plugging in my Studio Projects C1, which I know is really brite - sort of that Cheryl Crow harsh sound - great for rock music.

I would say for female vocals and acoustic music the Rode kills. for rock the C1 (at $150) is perfect. The 414 is a great mic, but mine is over 20 years old, and it seems like the beef is the most prominent feature of the sound. I suppose for a thin voice it would be good. However, by boosting the lows and cutting the mids on the Rode you can get the same result. Can you tell that I really like the Rode mic? And it's only $400! Not to be confused with the original Rode mics, which were a little thin sounding compared to this one. The NT2A is a new capsule design, the same capsule as their killer tube mic. The mic comes with no shock mount, but they're only another $40.
Anybody want to buy a used 4047? It's silver!

[qo]

Hi duncan. I agree the newer Rode mics are pretty decent value. The K2 is nice on some vox where a warmer sound than a 4050 is desired and the NTK can't be beat for male rap vox, imho.

"the 4050 is a little honky, with definition"

But it's also switchable between different polar patterns, so I'm assuming you were using it in cardiod, right? I get a lot of use out of the 4050; both for vox and for other things like room mic'ing drums, acoustic guitar. It's character changes dramatically in omni, which is generally how I prefer using it.

[m2]

M149--->1176--->DAW.
The sound was much more smooth espcially on the top end.
Although I prefer the latter, both setups can serve a purpose depending on what kind of sound you are going for.
So finally, is it possible? Definitely Yes!

Really?! Right on! I can honestly say I would not have tried that that way. Cool. I'm going to go do that right now! You are essentially using the 1176 as a pre right? Is there any challenge in getting the gain structure set up without a Pre? Thanks!