Handheld condensers

D

dogn4u

New member
I've been doing some solo acoustic gigs using my SWR California Blonde II for my PA - just my vox and acoustic guitar. I have a channel strip for my acoustic so I can compress and EQ it slightly, but on vocals, I've just been using a 25 year old SM57 - which sounds pretty good, actually, but has a very tiny sweet spot. I'll probably end up getting another channel strip/preamp - and microphone - for the vocals - a little compression should open up that sweet spot, plus I'd like the option of a little EQ.
Here's my question, though: I notice all the major mike players - Shure; Blue; Rode; AT, et al - are starting to make handheld condenser mikes, and wondered if anybody had any performance experience with any of them? Or could recommend one over the other? I might just buy another Rode NT1, which I feel is hands down the best low-priced condenser out there...but I'm a little concerned about it getting knocked about, etc. Any thoughts?
Thx
Rudi
 
Hey Rudi.....A hand held condenser microphone is a totally different beast than what you have now.
I've found them to be a bit on the high end harsh side , but if that is what your looking for.
You almost have to learn to sing all over again with in regards to microphone technique.

For live shows, I've always liked a Shure Beta 58 for vocals and they have always served me well.





:cool:
 
Starting to? Shure, AT, and Senn have made stage condensers for at least 30 years . . . Blue and Rode are newer to the game though.
 
moresound said:
I've found them to be a bit on the high end harsh side :cool:
Click to expand...

You know what? You're not the first person I've heard that from. Also have heard about problems with excessive sibilance. Still, there must be a noticeable difference between a $200 SM86 (Shure), a $325 S1 (Rode) and a $700 KSM9 (Shure) or KMS105 (Neumann). Plus, I've heard that Neumann mikes, while very nice, are overpriced; that the same $3K+ that a U87 costs would be better spent on a couple of Blues or an AT 4047 ribbon and a Mojave MA-200.

Speaking of Rode mikes, when i bought my first NT1 about 10-15 years ago ($200), just for kicks I A/B'd it with a 414 ($1000) and - IMHO - the Rode won hands down. Then again, I've never liked the sound of AKGs - not the mikes nor the headphones.

But of course music, as with any art, boils down to individual and unique perspectives. One man's meat is another man's Milli Vanilli. Remember ol' Rob and Fab? No right or wrong. If you liked Milli Vanilli, than good for you.

On the other hand, there ARE some characteristics of mikes that 99.9% of recording musicians, engineers, and producers would agree are generally "good" and "bad" Clarity = good. Muffled = bad. Smooth EQ curve = good. Huge peaks and valleys of response in different frequencies = bad. And so on. I think the simple key test is one of the best - just jingle a ring of keys (the more the better) near the capsule. A nice, undistorted bright, crisp jangle is what you want to hear from a good condenser - especially monitored with some good headphones.
Cheers
 
And yet a very large majority of top shows are run with them (or headworn condensers). We run wireless Beta 87s with no troubles.
 
dogn4u said:
. . . but has a very tiny sweet spot. . .
Click to expand...

Isn't that one of the reasons that they have the SM58?

I've had a pair of AT handheld condensers for over 30 years now. They still sound fine but they respond like they were designed with the "small sweet spot" approach to reducing feedback. Definitely run the PFL procedure if you're adding a condenser to your live show.

Paj
8^)
 
Paj said:
Isn't that one of the reasons that they have the SM58?
Click to expand...

I guess so...except I don't like the sound of the 58. If I liked the 58, I would buy one before considering $2-300 or more for a condenser. Even for vocals, I prefer the response curve of the 57.
 
The only vocalist I work with the uses a hand held condenser is using an older Shure AX5, beat to hell but still works. The sound is detailed but not a bit harsh and it stands up to his rather powerful baritone rock voice very well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top