I am Buying a Shure SM7B and was wondering how important an external compressor would be to use with it to record hip-hop vocals. I was using an M-audio Fast track interface but thinking of upgrading that as well.
Shure SM7B Mic and Compressor Question.
- Thread starter iamstacks
- Start date
jimmys69
MOODerator
This is a loaded, or maybe wrongly directed question. The SM7b, does not allow you to get into the range where proximity effect becomes an issue. The outer grille stops you from getting close enough to the capsule, to where a lack of understanding of mic control, could get you to need a compressor to limit peaks. That being said, I would never use a compressor on the input chain, to control levels of a singer who did not have an understanding of 'working' a mic. I only use a compressor while recording, for sculpting a particular tone. Never for volume control.
The SM7b helps a bit more than a pencil, or electrified pop filter, for stopping a singer/rapper from eating the mic. As arcaxis said, you do need a decent preamp with a substantial clean gain preamp, in order to get the benefits of the SM7b, without a buttload of preamp noise.
Forget about using a compressor unless you understand what I just said.
The SM7b helps a bit more than a pencil, or electrified pop filter, for stopping a singer/rapper from eating the mic. As arcaxis said, you do need a decent preamp with a substantial clean gain preamp, in order to get the benefits of the SM7b, without a buttload of preamp noise.
Forget about using a compressor unless you understand what I just said.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
As Arcaxis says, a compressor isn't necessary at all. What you do need is a mic pre amp with lots of clean gain because the SM7B has a particularly (and to my mind uselessly) low output. My experience with the Fast Track is that it will be borderline, depending on how loud your voice is.
Sigh. I'll never work out why the SM7B (or RE20 for that matter) is so popular, mainly with Americans. I wouldn't give houseroom to either of them--too low in output and far too lacking in upper end detail and clarity. They're fine if you want to sound like an American AM radio announcer, but....
Sigh. I'll never work out why the SM7B (or RE20 for that matter) is so popular, mainly with Americans. I wouldn't give houseroom to either of them--too low in output and far too lacking in upper end detail and clarity. They're fine if you want to sound like an American AM radio announcer, but....
jimmys69
MOODerator
I think it may have more to do with American 'loud' type of singers. I have had good results with SM7b for many of these types of rock doods, who wish to belt things out at high volumes. My silly Rode NT1a shrieks at the thought of capturing these type of vocals. Just nasty sounding. Though, the Rode seems to get that from many...
Even a female singer, with not a bunch of power, had good results with the SM7b in my home studio. Though, A good preamp with EQ, could be part of the equation that made it work for her/me.
HERE is a link to an audition video (in my studio, by the female I mentioned), using the SM7b. This video is the actual performance. SM7b through Vintech X73i, directly into Cubase, with music backing track. Likely, not the greatest mic for her, but it did do the trick. Because it was an audition video, we opted not to use a pop filter. Earbuds in her ears for monitoring, so cans were not strapped to her head.
We are actually redoing this video with a local video production company, to get a better looking video. Any advice as to making this better from an audio standpoint, would be greatly appreciated.
S**t, I should probably start a new thread huh....
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Recording through a compressor...? I wouldn't recommend it.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Ah, you can't go wrong with a bit of Evanessence! She has a lovely voice--I enjoyed that!
You asked for comments on the audio side...purely my opinons to follow:
I really, really wanted to hear more sparkle and detail in her upper ranges than the SM7B offered. (Well, hey, I had to get at least one dig into the Shure mic!)
The mix, at least to me, needed a bit more vocal and a bit less backing track.
I found the reverb on the voice (suitable for the track) didn't sit well with the backing which is relatively dry. Maybe back off the vocal reverb slightly or put a bit more on the backing track (or both) Frankly, I always find this to be an issue when dealing with backing tracks. I hate it! (But have done far too much of it!)
The other backing track trick I've used is to apply just a bit of EQ to the music to cut frequencies where the fundamentals of the vocal sit--in this case say 250 to 600 or 700 Hz. A small cut is enough...maybe 3dB...but this seems to help vocals "sit" with backing tracks rather than sound like two different recordings (which they are, of course).
I bet you wish you hadn't asked!
You asked for comments on the audio side...purely my opinons to follow:
I really, really wanted to hear more sparkle and detail in her upper ranges than the SM7B offered. (Well, hey, I had to get at least one dig into the Shure mic!)
The mix, at least to me, needed a bit more vocal and a bit less backing track.
I found the reverb on the voice (suitable for the track) didn't sit well with the backing which is relatively dry. Maybe back off the vocal reverb slightly or put a bit more on the backing track (or both) Frankly, I always find this to be an issue when dealing with backing tracks. I hate it! (But have done far too much of it!)
The other backing track trick I've used is to apply just a bit of EQ to the music to cut frequencies where the fundamentals of the vocal sit--in this case say 250 to 600 or 700 Hz. A small cut is enough...maybe 3dB...but this seems to help vocals "sit" with backing tracks rather than sound like two different recordings (which they are, of course).
I bet you wish you hadn't asked!
WhiteStrat
Don't stare at the eye.
AM radio announcer? Lacking in upper end detail and clarity? I think not. I'm not trying to argue--I used to think the same thing. This session (a double CD of 24 tracks, from piano ballads like this, to country/pop/rock tunes with a full band--all lead vox on the SM7b) changed my mind.
Some highlights (so you don't have to listen to the whole thing): 0:24 - 0:40, soft and sweet--listen to the gentle consonants at the end of phrases; 2:00 - 2:05, an example of a VERY soft, intimate line--but still very detailed; 2:55 - 3:20, opening up and getting big! (Oh yeah--check out the whisper of an ending staring at about 3:47--I was surprised by the detail and clarity from a dynamic, esp. with such a delicate delivery.)
This mic wouldn't have been my first choice for a female with her range, but after auditioning a half dozen mics, she picked it! I wasn't happy, but I figured we'd track a song or two, then I'd play the roughs for her and she'd change her mind. Nope, I changed my mind. The SM7b is more versatile than even I thought. And my preamp was by no means cranked--I think sometimes we exaggerate just how much juice it needs, too.
All just food for thought.
jimmys69
MOODerator
Naw, I am glad I asked.
A bit more into the project at hand:
There were two camera operators, myself, and Mia in the studio at the same time. Using a condenser mic for this situation, would have made it difficult to really capture her performance, without all of the noises in the control room (my largest room, that worked best for capturing the video). She has not yet controlled her esses so well yet, and the fact that a pop filter was out of the question, in order to see her pretty face, I opted for the 7b as a compromise for the situation at hand. It seemed to work well.
As far as the backing track is concerned, I agree that the I could tweak the verb a bit to help mix the live vocal with the backing track. I did cut frequencies at some points, to make room for the vocal track. This particular backing track was purchased from a site that gave a choice of which parts of the original tracks you would like to use. We chose to download none of the original vocals/backing vocals. The biggest issue I think, with the overall sound of the backing track, is that you get an MP3, and not a good quality one, of the tracks. Even then, they do not even seem to be the 'real' tracks from the original recording. Not sure where they come up with all this stuff anyway...
The fact that this is an audition recording, for a show called 'The Voice', it is not a possibility to fake the performance. It cannot be a lip sync type of thing.
There is another song we are using for the audition tape, but I personally can't stand the song. 'The Climb' by Miley Cyrus. Yuck!
Here. Watch at risk of getting this stuck in your head for eternity....
jimmys69
MOODerator
Very nice. Better than I would have even thought. Great voice too.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Nice recording of a very pleasant voice. Despite your timings I listened to the whole thing because I enjoyed it! I think you got the very best you could out of the SM7B.
However, to my ear--and I stress it's just an opinion--it somehow lacks a "sparkle" that we could maybe get with other mics. It should be said that my personal taste is towards a bright top end--others disagree and neither of us is right or wrong. That's the great thing about sound recording--everyone likes something slightly different. The HR Forum has lots of SM7B missionaries...just count me as the sinister opposition! I'll take condensers and tube mics instead and let you criticise me for the harsh top end that I describe as bright and "sparkly".
Anyhow, mic debates aside, I really liked that track!
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Naw, I am glad I asked.
A bit more into the project at hand:
There were two camera operators, myself, and Mia in the studio at the same time. Using a condenser mic for this situation, would have made it difficult to really capture her performance, without all of the noises in the control room (my largest room, that worked best for capturing the video). She has not yet controlled her esses so well yet, and the fact that a pop filter was out of the question, in order to see her pretty face, I opted for the 7b as a compromise for the situation at hand. It seemed to work well.
As far as the backing track is concerned, I agree that the I could tweak the verb a bit to help mix the live vocal with the backing track. I did cut frequencies at some points, to make room for the vocal track. This particular backing track was purchased from a site that gave a choice of which parts of the original tracks you would like to use. We chose to download none of the original vocals/backing vocals. The biggest issue I think, with the overall sound of the backing track, is that you get an MP3, and not a good quality one, of the tracks. Even then, they do not even seem to be the 'real' tracks from the original recording. Not sure where they come up with all this stuff anyway...
The fact that this is an audition recording, for a show called 'The Voice', it is not a possibility to fake the performance. It cannot be a lip sync type of thing.
There is another song we are using for the audition tape, but I personally can't stand the song. 'The Climb' by Miley Cyrus. Yuck!
Here. Watch at risk of getting this stuck in your head for eternity....
Arrrggghhh...Miley Cyrus...must...not...listen...must...not...get...ear worm. Darn, too late!
FYI we have an Australian version of The Voice so I know exactly what you're talking about.
For the mic position, have you tried putting it on a boom just above her head, pointed down at her mouth? I find this can help the problem with esses, at least a little. It also encourages the singer to stand upright--I noticed her bending towards the mic a couple of times which is not the posture she wants. A high mic also works well for filming.
As I said to Whitestrat, it's purely down to personal taste but I'd still have gone with a condenser and yelled at the camera operators to be quiet. But I like yelling!
WhiteStrat
Don't stare at the eye.
Nice recording of a very pleasant voice. Despite your timings I listened to the whole thing because I enjoyed it! I think you got the very best you could out of the SM7B.
However, to my ear--and I stress it's just an opinion--it somehow lacks a "sparkle" that we could maybe get with other mics. It should be said that my personal taste is towards a bright top end--others disagree and neither of us is right or wrong. That's the great thing about sound recording--everyone likes something slightly different. The HR Forum has lots of SM7B missionaries...just count me as the sinister opposition! I'll take condensers and tube mics instead and let you criticise me for the harsh top end that I describe as bright and "sparkly".
Anyhow, mic debates aside, I really liked that track!
Thanks for the kind words. And the truth is, I actually agree. I like a bit more "sparkle" as well. In fact, I added some sparkle with EQ on this project. The saving grace is that the SM7b might be described as flat, but as such, it takes EQ very well.
Before I hit the big red button on this session, we auditioned about a half dozen mics. Maybe I had the vox too high in her headphones--but she was freaked out by the "spit and smack" sounds from her lips when we tried the condensers that I thought suited her best. I couldn't convince her that I could minimize those sounds in post, so we went with what made her comfortable. At the very least, it relaxed her, and gave her the room to sing comfortably. In the end, I think the SM7b worked fine--and she was happy, which was very important.
Since then (a couple years ago) I've acquired more "high-end" condenser mics--including a vintage C414, that I love on everything! I think that mic would have been even better. (I'm hoping to record her again--with the vintage C414!) But...given the stable of $300-$400 mics I had at the time of this project, I think we made the best choice.
WhiteStrat
Don't stare at the eye.
And I assume it goes without saying, but maybe I shouldn't assume that--so I'll say it here:
1) She was a top-notch singer, with exceptional mic technique. Her ability to move in on quiet passages and step back when belting was better than any compressor known to man. (As an engineer, my part in that was making sure she was hearing the right balance of voice vs. piano in her headphones when she was singing.)
2) Even after that, I chopped every track into tiny phrases and adjusted/automated volume to tame the peaks and accentuate the softer details. I also faded in and out of every phrase to eliminate unwanted noise and mouth sounds.
3) And even after that--there's a healthy dose of compression on the vocal track to smooth it all out and blend it in with the piano track.
My point is this--no matter how "pro" your mic is (and your preamp, for that matter), a) the initial performance is the most important thing. After that, b) as a "recording engineer" you have to be willing to spend the time editing and perfecting the vocal track to really fit the song.
For every 4 minute song she sang, I spent an hour or two massaging that vocal track--and it was worth it.
1) She was a top-notch singer, with exceptional mic technique. Her ability to move in on quiet passages and step back when belting was better than any compressor known to man. (As an engineer, my part in that was making sure she was hearing the right balance of voice vs. piano in her headphones when she was singing.)
2) Even after that, I chopped every track into tiny phrases and adjusted/automated volume to tame the peaks and accentuate the softer details. I also faded in and out of every phrase to eliminate unwanted noise and mouth sounds.
3) And even after that--there's a healthy dose of compression on the vocal track to smooth it all out and blend it in with the piano track.
My point is this--no matter how "pro" your mic is (and your preamp, for that matter), a) the initial performance is the most important thing. After that, b) as a "recording engineer" you have to be willing to spend the time editing and perfecting the vocal track to really fit the song.
For every 4 minute song she sang, I spent an hour or two massaging that vocal track--and it was worth it.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Actually, that's an important point...the price. In the UK, the list price for an SM7B was over £500 (say $750). Even the street price is in excess of £300/$450. A mic that's good at $350 is rather less so if it costs nearer $750. (I've never priced it here in Aus.) I've mentioned this before--Shure seems pretty bad when they translate there prices to other currencies and don't represent nearly as good value for money as they do in the USA. Maybe it would sparkle more for ears if it was cheaper!
Agree with ALL that, from the detail of the headphone mix to the time spent "massaging". Actually even an hour or two sounds like her mic technique gave you "easy" tracks to work with. On some disasters, I've spent days just tweaking the vocals.
WhiteStrat
Don't stare at the eye.
Good point on the price. My assessment of the "value" of this mic is completely related to the pain it caused my wallet. At twice the price my assessment might have been half as good.
And you're also right on the time spent "massaging" the vocal tracks. Since this was a big project--24 songs--I probably spent a lot more time on the first couple tracks. And yes, she gave me "easy" tracks to work with. After getting familiar with her particular patterns--how she rose on the high points and fell on the soft points, the remaining tracks went much quicker. Somewhere near the halfway point of the 24 tracks, I could actually "hear" the phrases by looking at the waveforms and get to 90% of the final sound by editing based just on what I saw. After listening to my edits, I'd make a tweak or two, but it's safe to say that track #24 went MUCH quicker than track #1 (or #2 or #3 for that matter).
somegeezer
4 Gazillion Rhodium User
It's £316 with free delivery. Take off the mandatory tax of 20%, and it's £252.80. [US$381.65/AU$365.78]
So it's a little over $350, but not to the point of more than it's worth.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
...except UK residents can't delete the VAT and it applies to every microphone you buy, not just the Shure. The price at, for example, DV24/7 is indeed £316 which is $478 US at today's exchange rate.
Whether the SM7B is worth the money at this price is purely a personal opinion. Many people on this forum would likely say yes. To my ears, there are tons of other mics in the £300-350 range I'd rather have. If it was a £200 microphone I might find space in my mic box for it--but not at £316. (And that's the cheapest I could find--lots of places are more expensive, some going to over £500.
But that's purely down to personal opinion. I just don't care for the SM7B sound (or the RE20 either for that matter). I certainly don't like the sound at a minimum of $478 instead of the typical $350ish in the USA.
somegeezer
4 Gazillion Rhodium User
"Shure seems pretty bad when they translate there prices to other currencies"
My point was that you were blaming Shure. They priced it basically the same. VAT is what the government add, and has nothing to do with Shure themselves.
How much it is worth on a personal level is certainly different. I've never tried one myself, but would like to. Apparently particularly fantastic on heavy guitar and gutteral Metal vocals. Two things I enjoy the use of greatly. Though there's almost always something cheaper than can do the same job if you look around.