dynamic or condenser?

M

mojoshmoe

New member
I don't know a whole lot about microphones. I know the technical differences between dynamic and condenser mics but it seems that they are both used for everything. Which is better for studio vocals?
 
* More accurate
* Respond to fast attacks and transients more precisley
* Add least amount of coloration
* Get a broader range of frequencies
* Can be used at a larger range of distance
* Records a Full sound.while including the room ambience
 
Shailat's right on with everything he said, but i've found many times when recording that the fanciest mic ain't always the best. Specifically, gritty "rock n roll" type vocals often sound better through a crappy mic than a good one. They just seem to sit in the track better. If the singer doesn't necessarily have the greatest voice, you might not wanna highlight every last detail of said voice. We were recording the other day and the singer started out with my AT4050 (a pretty nice condenser). It sounded OK, but not really edgy enough. We tried a SM58, which just sounded dead. Then we tried a Sennheiser 421. As soon as he started to sing, everyone in the control room said "YEAH!". It just had this particular midrange thing going on that was perfect for that track. So i guess my point is just that it's ok to reach for the most expensive mic you've got first, but if it's not the sound you're looking for, change mics before you start messing with EQ and whatnot.
 
Both are popular, it depends on the source. That will dictate the best mic.
All these answers are right. That's what makes recording unique. Otherwise we would all be bored with productions out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top