Rode K2 and Shure SM7b 'Tests'
I have just finished three days of recording with the Rode K2 condenser, and Shure SM7b dynamic mic., and wanted to share a few of my impressions.
'Method'
First, I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of the SM7b, even though, in my opinion, the Rode is superior in every way.
I did some plosive tests (decided to use the 'Peter Piper' rhyme), and then recorded a very alliterative sentence that I had concocted in which each word started with and often contained a lot of esses. I used each of these to test the Rode in its three polar patterns, and to test the Shure in its 4 different frequency response settings.
I then spent the last two days recording a song of mine, using the Rode and the Shure to record acoustic guitar and vocals. I wasn't very disciplined about testing the microphones in each of their configurations with the guitar track, but I drove myself crazy recording the vocal tracks.
For the latter, I used both microphones at once, often stopping to change the microphones' settings. Then, for the hell of it, I spent hours singing and re-singing the song on discreet tracks, changing microphone configurations for each track.
Impressions
Shure SM7b dynamic
I really liked the Shure SM7b's 'Presence Boost' setting, disliked its 'Flat' setting, and thought that its 'Bass Rolloff' was effective and O.K.. There is a fourth permutation/'setting' that the switches on the SM7b can be configured to, and which is not mentioned in the brief instruction booklet that comes with the SM7b. I tested that configuration, too, and didn't like the sound, finding it too flat and lifeless.
I ran into a problem with the SM7b that apparently affects some preamps when combined with the SM7b - that of the preamps not providing a lot of gain.
I basically just got away with getting a decent record level with my Presonus Firestudio, but if I buy the SM7b, I might still invest in one of the few 'mic. boosters' that moresound posted about above in this thread (thanks, once again, moresound).
The mic. booster are:
the Triton Audio Fethead, Triton Audio FetHead | Preamps @ ZenProAudio.com; the Cloudlifter CL-1 Mic Activator Phantom-powered gain booster for low-output dynamic and ribbon mics, Phantom-powered gain booster for low-output dynamic and ribbon mics; and the Sanken HAD-48 Pre-Amplifier for Dynamic Microphone (Not available in EU area and China), SANKEN MICROPHONE CO .,LTD. | Product [ HAD-48 ].
As everyone says, the SM7b is very good (although not excellent, I found) at isolating all but the audio sources closest to the microphone. I liked this, but wanted a little more 'air'.
Two complaints I have about the Shure that I rented/hired are that I could not change the pop filter (despite following the instructions to do so), and the tightening screws on either side of the mount were totally ineffective, causing the body of the mic. to have to rest on its mount (presumably the screws had been damaged and become ineffective through use).
The SM7b performed well for me in the plosive and Ess tests, although I could detect slight plosives with the smaller pop filter (the one that I couldn't remove), but overall it was quite good.
In the 'Presence Boost' configuration, the SM7b coloured the mid-range of my voice in the way that I had hoped it would, and I found that very pleasing. I also liked the way that the microphone recorded my acoustic guitar.
Overall, in all its configurations, I found the SM7b somewhat 'dark', but not displeasing. My only real issues would be the difficulty in getting a good level, and wanting a bit more 'air' in the higher frequencies.
Rode K2 Condenser
The Rode K2 was impressive.
I liked it more than the Audio Projects C1 condenser that I recently tested at a friend's place, although I would say that both microphones provide - in various configurations - a good impression of the room in which the recordings took place. However, I found that the 3 polar settings on the Rode's power supply each allow more versatile control than either the C1 or the SM7b.
I found that the Figure 8 setting on the Rode allowed me to 'hear myself' the best when singing (i.e., allowed me to singing with the monitor signal in my headphones rather than competing with it), although the Cardiod setting - as expected - blocked out more reflections than the Figure 8 or the Omni settings.
While not necessarily 'dark' in character, I found the K2 to be less 'airy' than the Audio Projects C1, although a lot more 'airy' than the Shure SM7b. But I really liked the K2's sound - I don't really know how to describe it - not quite 'neutral'.....
I found it very easy to get a good recording level with the K2, and found it more versatile on acoustic guitar than the Shure (and, as I tried to say above, it provides more possibilities for voice, I think).
One thing that I didn't like about the Rode was that in two of the three polar patterns I found that my esses were somewhat slurred; I think that the Figure 8 and Omni settings did this, although I don't have my notes in front of me right now to confirm. I found this strange.
I should emphasize that I have only done a bit of preliminary mixing on the track I recorded, so this statement is not conclusive, but it seems that both sets of recordings are somewhat similar in character, and definitely (for me) require EQ boosts in the mid and high frequencies.
Both the Rode and the Shure surprised me with the marked differences between them, and between their various settings/configurations.
I will keep this thread updated as I do more tests.
GVDV.
