50 dollar headset VS 300 dollar condenser + micpre

[warlock110]

I'm getting into this dicussion with some dude on another forum who claims that a 50 dollar headset when record will sound just as good as 200 dollars gear com condenser + micpre. my choice for the argument is the M-audio audio buddy + Project studio B1 that costs around 170 or 200 at most.

Notice that the setting is quite simple
His setting
headset going into sound card directly

My Setting
Mic into Preamp into sound card.

I'm claiming that mine will sound noticeably better, i've never seen any ~50 dollars headset that sounded good, the good stuff are freaking way out of that range. but i just wanted to get some more opinion on here, I don't have the money to buy everything and test, but physics don't fail people, a mic as big as a condenser should sound better than that tiny little thing on the headset.


Another setup, he's claiming that him using the Great river MV-1NV + SM57 will sound significantly better than the setup i listed above (M-audio audio buddy + Studio Project B1). The cost is 5X as much, and he said it'll yield noticable better result. is that true?

 

[jamacian]

Kinda dumb to ask people what they think. The only way to tell is to get someone who can perform consistently who has all the gear to do takes at identical volumes on a piece of music and compare. The question is not which will sound better but better for what.

The 57 and Great River will most likely kick all the other's asses for all around fidelity though. Baseless opinion there.

 

[dgatwood]

I'm getting into this dicussion with some dude on another forum who claims that a 50 dollar headset when record will sound just as good as 200 dollars gear com condenser + micpre. my choice for the argument is the M-audio audio buddy + Project studio B1 that costs around 170 or 200 at most.

Audio Buddy... isn't that the one that only delivers about 30V phantom power instead of 48V? Most mics will not perform to their full potential with that pre, FWIW.

The B1 is a decent mic, or so I've read. I've only used a B3, and found it to be a little harsh but serviceable. Not my favorite mic, but not junk, either.

I'm claiming that mine will sound noticeably better, i've never seen any ~50 dollars headset that sounded good, the good stuff are freaking way out of that range. but i just wanted to get some more opinion on here, I don't have the money to buy everything and test, but physics don't fail people, a mic as big as a condenser should sound better than that tiny little thing on the headset.

It's not the size that counts.... I wouldn't attempt to use a headset mic for anything other than live work, personally, but I wouldn't put it past somebody to use some of the recent Panasonic electret capsules in a cheap headset. Somebody could conceivably build a decent one in the $50-100 price range... at least in theory.

Another setup, he's claiming that him using the Great river MV-1NV + SM57 will sound significantly better than the setup i listed above (M-audio audio buddy + Studio Project B1). The cost is 5X as much, and he said it'll yield noticable better result. is that true?

I wouldn't think so, no. The word "good" does not describe any sound I've ever heard come from an SM57 when used with any pre. A pre can't put back something that isn't there in the first place, and the SM57 high end rolloff just sounds inherently muddy to my ears. YMMV, I suppose. Maybe if you redesigned the headbasket with no plastic and a much more open mesh... or maybe if you were recording somebody scraping a nail on a piece of glass and you wanted to cut down on the highs or something.... On the other hand, if somebody already has a nail, there are much better things to do with an SM57.

The Great River with the B1 would almost certainly decimate the Audio Buddy with the B1, though.

 

[warlock110]

that's presisely what i've thought it to be, i mean, there's never an EXACT or ALWAYS thing with sound, but on paper i do not ever think that a 50 dollar headset would push the envelop on a 150 dollar condenser with a dedicated mic pre.

The Audio Buddy phantom power is not clear whether it does pump full power, but i've never heard of a reported failure, but reports have been decent (atleast not a problem with phantom power not working). But that was just example, i was stupid to buy the audio buddy before i found out, if you step up to the Studio project VT1, or the DMP3 then the story changes drastically, and the price only get bump up like 50 bucks.

 

[tdukex]

"Another setup, he's claiming that him using the Great river MV-1NV + SM57 will sound significantly better than the setup i listed above (M-audio audio buddy + Studio Project B1). The cost is 5X as much, and he said it'll yield noticable better result. is that true?"

I wouldn't think so, no. The word "good" does not describe any sound I've ever heard come from an SM57 when used with any pre.

Are you kidding? An Audiobuddy + B1 beating a Great River + SM57? I guess all those engineers recording electric guits through SM57 + Great Rivers should ditch that setup and go for the Audiobuddy + B1!

You did say YMMV.

SM57 through my Sebatron rocks on both electric guit and vox. IMO, YMMV.

 

[warlock110]

"Another setup, he's claiming that him using the Great river MV-1NV + SM57 will sound significantly better than the setup i listed above (M-audio audio buddy + Studio Project B1). The cost is 5X as much, and he said it'll yield noticable better result. is that true?"



Are you kidding? An Audiobuddy + B1 beating a Great River + SM57? I guess all those engineers recording electric guits through SM57 + Great Rivers should ditch that setup and go for the Audiobuddy + B1!

You did say YMMV.

SM57 through my Sebatron rocks on both electric guit and vox. IMO, YMMV.

he never said it would beat it, the fact that the setup cost 5X more money have to be taken into consideration with respect to "HOW MUCH" better.

 

[SomeAudioGuy]

It's all going to be subjective.

That's such a crap answer.

As I'm assuming you're recording vocals, I personally would recommend a condenser over a dynamic or a headset mic, but it would be best to take a listen to all three first.

If you're not recording vocals, tdukex makes a great point that the 57 is sort of industry standard for instruments.

 

[jamacian]

The word "good" does not describe any sound I've ever heard come from an SM57 when used with any pre.

So how many preamps have you tried the 57 with?

The 57 is a kick ass dynamic mic and I have never heard it sound muddy ever. Maybe gritty but not muddy. Until you have heard the 57 through a Great River or John Hardy I really don't want to hear you say it can't sound good with any preamp. That's just not true.

 

[warlock110]

It's all going to be subjective.

That's such a crap answer.

As I'm assuming you're recording vocals, I personally would recommend a condenser over a dynamic or a headset mic, but it would be best to take a listen to all three first.

If you're not recording vocals, tdukex makes a great point that the 57 is sort of industry standard for instruments.

it's vocal recording.

 

[dgatwood]

So how many preamps have you tried the 57 with?

Probably a dozen or so---always somebody else's gear. The SM57 specs say it ends at 15 kHz, and it does. No preamp can fix that, and that's what sounds bad to me.

Using it on toms is a special case because you have overheads to make up for the missing highs. That's not the same as using it by itself. Even the worst sounding mic can add something useful if it's used in conjunction with other mics (and the SM57 is nowhere near the worst sounding mic I've heard).

Every mic sounds better on some things than others, and the SM57 is no exception, but I haven't found anything where the SM57 was the best choice. It seems universally average to me---a jack of all trades, but master of none. Running it into a high end pre just seems like feeding Wal-Mart-branded dry dog food to a prize poodle. Just my $0.02.

 

[boingoman]

I think your next project should be finding out what makes farts stinkier- cheese or beans.

 

[jamacian]

Probably a dozen or so---always somebody else's gear. The SM57 specs say it ends at 15 kHz, and it does. No preamp can fix that, and that's what sounds bad to me.

Using it on toms is a special case because you have overheads to make up for the missing highs. That's not the same as using it by itself. Even the worst sounding mic can add something useful if it's used in conjunction with other mics (and the SM57 is nowhere near the worst sounding mic I've heard).

Every mic sounds better on some things than others, and the SM57 is no exception, but I haven't found anything where the SM57 was the best choice. It seems universally average to me---a jack of all trades, but master of none. Running it into a high end pre just seems like feeding Wal-Mart-branded dry dog food to a prize poodle. Just my $0.02.

15k missing highs? On vocals???
Funny!

 

[dgatwood]

15k missing highs? On vocals???
Funny!

Funny? Not at all. Voice consists of two basic things: various random noises made by air and the fundamental and its harmonics.

A solid soprano can sing up to G6. At that range, a 15 kHz cutoff is only the 10th harmonig. The first formant peak extends up to the 10th harmonic (source: pnas.org, so the second formant in a soprano's upper range would be completely gone in an SM57.

Of course, the second format extends to the 26th harmonic, which for a soprano's upper range would be almost doube the higherst frequency a human can hear. (Incidentally, this is one reason that sopranos are harder to understand than lower voices.) As a result, it is going to be mostly gone anyway, but that's not the case for all vocal ranges. The point here is that the harmonic content extends way beyond the human hearing range, so picking an arbitrary cutoff frequency is a bad idea.

For example, the highest note I can sing is about a C5. The 26th harmonic of that is 13kHz. I'm a tenor. So for guys, 15kHz is fine, but barely. For women, as soon as you exceed the bottom octave or so of their range, a 15kHz cutoff loses a good chunk of the second formant.

The second thing that affects the character of the sound of a voice is all the extraneous noises that come from air blowing across stuff---their teeth, through various parts of their nasal passages, etc. Those frequencies can also get way up there.

 

[amra]

Funny? Not at all. Voice consists of two basic things: various random noises made by air and the fundamental and its harmonics.

I don't know about fundamental harmonics, but if you can't get a nice guitar sound with an SM57 you might be fundamentally retarded...

 

[omtayslick]

My brother in law told me about a guy who uses the built in mic on his digital answering machine for vocals, instead of his mid-level studio mics. He says it sounds better for his vocals. I heard one of the guys recordings, it didn't sound bad. Go figure.

 

[tdukex]

he never said it would beat it, the fact that the setup cost 5X more money have to be taken into consideration with respect to "HOW MUCH" better.

Ok, so now you want to start splitting semantic hairs:

Well...did the guy say "significantly" or "noticeably" better. They do not mean the same thing.

How 'bout this:

The dude who said the SM57 + Grear River being either "significantly" or "noticeably" better than the B1 + Audiobuddy in most applications is going to be correct in most people's opinion.

And attempting to create an exponential relationship between the cost of different pieces of gear and their perceived performance (i.e. it cost five times as much, therefore...) is an exercise in futility.

It's not a question of if it is 5X better; it is a question of if it is worth it to you. For some it is, for some it isn't.

If you want to believe that an SM57 + Grear River is not either "significantly" or "noticeably" or "5X" better than the B1 + Audiobuddy (whatever measurement you decide to use), you will at least save yourself some money.

 

[jamacian]

I don't know about fundamental harmonics, but if you can't get a nice guitar sound with an SM57 you might be fundamentally retarded...

Word to that. Tech won't tell you how it sounds. I bet any amount of money if I took my 414 and my 57 side by side 9 out of 10 people would not detect any more air on the 414. Like I said, maybe a bit of grit but the 57 has plenty of top end for even drum overheads. If you don't think so you are deaf or you have never tried it.

 

[jamacian]

If you get "dull" with a high end bump like this you are having serious recording issues that we probably won't be able to solve here today. You may want to try a different 57, yours sounds like it might be broken.

 

[kojdogg]

"dull" is kind of a subjective term-- his "dull" may not = your "dull"
it's not that uncommon an observation that sm57's are midrange heavy and lacking in its higher frequency response.
dgatwood, perhaps-- if you're planning on using your 57's as hammers and such anyway, it's worth doing the boiled sm57 transformer-less mod and seeing if it works for you?

 

[dgatwood]

"dull" is kind of a subjective term-- his "dull" may not = your "dull"
it's not that uncommon an observation that sm57's are midrange heavy and lacking in its higher frequency response.
dgatwood, perhaps-- if you're planning on using your 57's as hammers and such anyway, it's worth doing the boiled sm57 transformer-less mod and seeing if it works for you?

I don't own one. I've just used a bunch of them at schools, churches, etc. over the years.