Is this microphone good enough for recording male vocals?

I am planning to record myself singing at home (on a budget!) and already have this microphone:
It's a condenser microphone, just very small and directional.

The recording sounds ok to me, but I'm wondering if a larger microphone would give significantly better quality recordings particularly the lower frequencies?
 
A larger microphone won’t inherently give you better recordings. A dedicated interface and XLR mic will. The converters inside those USB mics are small and cheap, so they won’t be so great, and it’s also taking up space for the electronics of the mic.
 
Audio Technica is a pretty reputable brand, but a gaming mike is designed for a specific purpose. Vocal quality for gaming is not critical.

If you already have the microphone, it's not a bad one to start off with.

If you find it unsatisfactory, and you intend to spend a lot more time recording your singing, then as CrowsofFritz noted, get yourself an interface and just about any of the contemporary vocal mikes.
 
Straight up, looking at the specs, no.

The response range on this mic is 40 to 16,000 Hz, which means that you're losing out on a fair portion of the audio spectrum.

Small diaphragm condensers (SDC) like this are generally not the best mics for vocals regardless.

Plus, as others have said, you'll get better results with an interface and the ability to swap out mics.
 
Straight up, looking at the specs, no.

The response range on this mic is 40 to 16,000 Hz, which means that you're losing out on a fair portion of the audio spectrum.

Small diaphragm condensers (SDC) like this are generally not the best mics for vocals regardless.

Plus, as others have said, you'll get better results with an interface and the ability to swap out mics.
Hi Steve,
From doing some research, the full range of human hearing is usually slightly more than 40-16kHz, but the human voice doesn't usually produce sounds outside this range.
My voice is middle of the range anyway, not very low or high.
So I don't think the range will be an issue.

"Small diaphragm condensers (SDC) like this are generally not the best mics for vocals"
This is what I was concerned about, as I thought the small size of the microphone would result in a less accurate representation of the voice,
particularly lower frequencies, like around 100-200 Hz.
However, I have not yet found this information in any technical article, just my own intuition based on the wavelength of sound.

Still, I am surprised by the recording quality of this little USB mic and wonder if it's good because Audio Technica is one of the best brands, and they have come up with a great design.
 
A larger microphone won’t inherently give you better recordings. A dedicated interface and XLR mic will. The converters inside those USB mics are small and cheap, so they won’t be so great, and it’s also taking up space for the electronics of the mic.
I used to have an interface and XLR mic.
What advantage do they have over a USB mic exactly?
Is it a lower noise/signal ratio?

Given that the interface has to plug into the computer's motherboard anyway, it has to convert the signal to USB also.
Since going through an interface would require additional connections and wires, I thought that might introduce more noise, not less.

I'm not doubting that you're right, I'm just looking for a more technical explanation.
 
Audio Technica is a pretty reputable brand, but a gaming mike is designed for a specific purpose. Vocal quality for gaming is not critical.

If you already have the microphone, it's not a bad one to start off with.

If you find it unsatisfactory, and you intend to spend a lot more time recording your singing, then as CrowsofFritz noted, get yourself an interface and just about any of the contemporary vocal mikes.
Hi Gecko,
Yes, I considered the gaming aspect, however I think the only "gaming" aspects of it are that it's directional, and the recording range slightly narrower (to suit the human voice, and not musical instruments).

The directional aspect is certainly favorable to my recording environment as I don't have a sound-proof room, and directionality cuts down on ambient noise.
 
I used to have an interface and XLR mic.
What advantage do they have over a USB mic exactly?
Is it a lower noise/signal ratio?

Given that the interface has to plug into the computer's motherboard anyway, it has to convert the signal to USB also.
Since going through an interface would require additional connections and wires, I thought that might introduce more noise, not less.

I'm not doubting that you're right, I'm just looking for a more technical explanation.
The main advantages of interface over USB mike are:
1 Interfaces are designed specifically for full duplex recording, and accordngly are generally built to a higher standard
2 Interfaces allow for a variety of inputs, which is handy if you are expecting to be recording into the longer term
3 Interfaces do not limit you to one mic. You can upgrade, or use different mikes for different purposes.

The interface does not convert anything to USB. USB is simply the means of getting data in and out of the computer. USB mics and interfaces both covert your analog audio input to a digital signal that is processed by the computer. Between a USB interface or a USB mikem the only extra wire is the mike cable, which is a negligible noise contributer.

If you are happy with your gaming mike, simply continue with it.
 
Thanks Gecko for the extra detail.
I'm planning to get an Izotope membership to process the audio, and since they have advanced software for noise removal and effects, I'm hoping the end result will be pretty good.
 
Aaaagh my pet hate. Isotope is great for repair, although I know lots of people disagree. capture the very best sound you can get. Don’t record any noise. The results are vastly superior to trying to fix it from an inferior source.

it’s very difficult for newcomers to understand some things because we don’t have good words for audio explanations, and one person’s term might be very different in somebodies head. The frequency response thing is a good one. 20-20k is common for condensers, but my hearing is gone totally over 13k, and my 25 year old guitarist friend is now losing it at 12.5 and that scared him. Equally, the low b on my bass I can tune by ear, but other people can’t. They hear it, but not accurately enough. The tuners, with their $5 condenser capsule hear it fine!
we should also think about application. A dynamic up against the lips has cardioid proximity effect in bucket loads, so a rolled off bass end is a positive thing really. you don’t put an SDC condenser on your lips and sing, it sounds horrible. I don’t think it makes dynamics bad or condensers good, they’re different. Some, but not all SDCs, sound harsh, but that’s often because they’re used on the wrong sound sources. Large Diaphragm mics tend to be warmer, that’s dynamics and condensers, so you pick the right one for the job.years ago I only had two mics, an SM57 and a cheap SDC one or the other would do the trick.

I use quite a lot of expensive headset mics, DPA’s in the main. Musical theatre the use. All omnis. The audio is clean and you can eq it for practically every singer, the few who sound a bit odd might mean a countryman or Sennheiser. Gaming mics are totally different. They are designed for clear comms, NOT quality. People getting excited and yelling, or calm and quiet. That asks a lot, so you use band limited mics. In communications the transmit bandwidth is very narrow, so a mic with bass response is unimportant because wind noise is bass, and is filtered off at source. Top limit could be 6k or even lower to save bandwidth. They don’t test gaming products for music in either ability or quality terms.

we’ve said it before but it IS possible to get good sounding USB mics, with well designed and most critically, upgradable drivers. How many years before windows 12 comes out and the sub spec changes so your mic wont work? Four, five? A fifty year old mic with an XLR output can plug into the latest interface, and few people will want to stay for ever with just one mic. How about if you need to do an interview with two people? How about you need to record something in stereo, worst case is you need lots of mics? Buy a nice ordinary mic and plug in for now to a modest interface. This can be upgraded if your needs change. USB mics are one shot products. One mic. End of story. A few have got their macs working on multiple drivers but report problems with stereo due to timing. USB is just mono. Most of the manufacturers have one usb mic in their range, but they’re selling these to a new podcasting market, not to established users.

if you need noise reduction software, then the mic and usb combination is a toy, and not worthy of serious results. The isotope products are great but it would be cheaper to buy a decent mic and interface and have an upgrade path surely?
 
Hi Steve,
From doing some research, the full range of human hearing is usually slightly more than 40-16kHz, but the human voice doesn't usually produce sounds outside this range.
My voice is middle of the range anyway, not very low or high.
So I don't think the range will be an issue.

"Small diaphragm condensers (SDC) like this are generally not the best mics for vocals"
This is what I was concerned about, as I thought the small size of the microphone would result in a less accurate representation of the voice,
particularly lower frequencies, like around 100-200 Hz.
However, I have not yet found this information in any technical article, just my own intuition based on the wavelength of sound.

Still, I am surprised by the recording quality of this little USB mic and wonder if it's good because Audio Technica is one of the best brands, and they have come up with a great design.
I've always read closer to 20-20k Hz

You can't sing a note anywhere in the 15kHz range, no; but there are overtones that will get lost. (Of course, this gets into the common debate of "should you HPF/LPF everything?" which I'm pretty firmly on the "no" side of)
 
I've always read closer to 20-20k Hz

You can't sing a note anywhere in the 15kHz range, no; but there are overtones that will get lost. (Of course, this gets into the common debate of "should you HPF/LPF everything?" which I'm pretty firmly on the "no" side of)
With vocals, the fundamental note that anyone can sing will struggle to get above 500hz. 1k for operatic sopranos highest note, which puts 16k four octaves above, or the 4th harmonic, which will not have a lot of power-if any. Since most people can't get within an octave of the upper reaches of an operatic soprano, 16k would be five or six octaves above the fundamental note. It's a couple octaves above the fundamental of sibilance.

The amount of useful sound above 15khz is pretty overstated, since a large part of the public can't hear that high and the span between 15k and 20k is only half an octave
 
Reading the topic again, I noticed one important word "will it improve the quality significantly?". I'm not even sure many mic swap changes are even about quality.

For any combination of source and microphone they have to be matched, and until you hear a singer, the best you can do is guess. One might flatter and another reveal? That's what it's all about.
 
With vocals, the fundamental note that anyone can sing will struggle to get above 500hz. 1k for operatic sopranos highest note, which puts 16k four octaves above, or the 4th harmonic, which will not have a lot of power-if any. Since most people can't get within an octave of the upper reaches of an operatic soprano, 16k would be five or six octaves above the fundamental note. It's a couple octaves above the fundamental of sibilance.

The amount of useful sound above 15khz is pretty overstated, since a large part of the public can't hear that high and the span between 15k and 20k is only half an octave
Fair.
I'd still be leery of intentionally chopping off frequencies on the human voice in particular. Of all the instruments, that's the one our ears are most fine-tuned to detect weirdness about.
 
Also, with a majority of the public listening to mp3's, I'm pretty sure everything above 12k is thrown out in the encoding process.
 
Also, with a majority of the public listening to mp3's, I'm pretty sure everything above 12k is thrown out in the encoding process.
Lol, that is absolutely true, but I'm never gonna encourage home recordists to intentionally aim low for mp3s!
 
I won't either, but no one should wringing their hands about information over 14k or under 50hz for a vocal mic. There is so little, if any, useful information in those areas. The concern is unwarranted.
 
The snag with any mic designed for communications as opposed to recording is the design is optimised for that. Aviation headsets are mega expensive - if you record them, you find the mics are really unpleasant and the headsets sound terrible on music. If you post a bit of you singing into that Audio Technica, we can tell you in an instant if it's worth keeping or replacing.
 
I would also caution people who get hung up on specs to realize that the "20-20kHz" that is always listed is REALLY suspect. There are almost never any tolerances for that spec, so it can be down 10dB at those points. The U47FET only claims 40-16,000.

There are tons of mics out there that have 4-5dB peaks in the middle and roll off by 4-5dB on the end. That's a variation of 8dB. Where those variations take place is what gives the mic it's voice. A dip at 100Hz and a peak at 5-10K is going to sound brighter than a mic with a bump at 200Hz and a small bump at 3K even though both may be +/- 4dB from 20-20K.
 
Back
Top