Looking for Purest way to get Acoustic Tracks.

[Somelsewhere]

Alright, I'm very new to the world or recording, and I have come to understand that although I can have instrumental knowledge and know what I want things to sound like, it entirely depends upon technical knowledge and equipment-know-how to translate what I think into recording.
Right now my biggest concern is to get a recorded sound onto my computer that is devoid of any electrical fuzz, hissing, clicks, whatnot...

I have about 500 dollars in grad-money as my budget, so my plan of action is:

Simple, cheap, effective equipment for an acoustic album sound, not exactly insane quality, just pure enough that the ear isn't distracted by electronics.
(Andy Mckee- Iron and Wine- Sufjan Stevens, not a Daughtry overproduced sound, ya know?)

Mic: I'm looking at the new Shure Sg27 USB condenser.
It has a built-in preamp so I'm thinking that if I can cut out the middle-man of a bunch of xlr cables and a mixer/console, I will have purer, more direct acoustic take. (correct? any better mics, ideas? Is USB not the way to go?)

Programs: Cakewalk or Sonar, I'm really looking at something with simplicity, think Garageband, something I can just get acoustic takes onto with little distraction or learning-curve. (? any other programs ?)


Do I need to worry about soundcards and whatnot, I'm basically technically illiterate, but I really, really, am trying to learn... the takes I did on my sister's mac on garage band just always had a hissing, electronic buzz... I long for a purity...help.

 

[iownrocknroll]

the most focused and purest method i've found is 2 SDC placed in XY around the 12th fret area with a LDC or Ribbon mic placed in between then the spaced pair with all the mics 6-12 inches away from the guitar

Watch for phase issues.

as far as brand and model of mic, that's your call, however this my go to configuration for capturing the guitar as it sounds.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I'm looking at the new Shure Sg27 USB condenser. It has a built-in preamp so I'm thinking that if I can cut out the middle-man of a bunch of xlr cables and a mixer/console, I will have purer, more direct acoustic take. (correct? any better mics, ideas? Is USB not the way to go?)

Did you perhaps mean PG27? I can find no reference to an SG27 on the Shure website. I have to confess from the start that whichever model number it is, I have no personal experience with either one, so I can't speak to that specific model. Even with that caveat in mind, though, there are a few things I'd recommend considering.

First, you are starting on a good track with the idea of keeping your signal chain simple, short and direct; I support that idea.

At the same time, however, two tomato soup cans connected by a string is also simple, short and direct, but you're probably not going to get that great of a sound out of it. The actual gear you use in that short signal chain matters.

USB mics basically combine three normally discreet functions in one container; the mic itself, the mic preamp, and the A/D converter. There is a tendency when "compacting" such functionality to focus on price and convenience and not so much sonic quality of the individual components. Also, in today's 2009 market, such USB mics are typically intended for one of two markets; podcasting and/or the casual recordist, neither of which have particularly stringent requirements for audio quality.

Again, I can't specifically say that with the PG27 specifically that you'll specifically get good or bad results, but until I tried one out or heard the results from one, I'd be very wary of selecting such a mic for "purity of sound" applications sound unheard.

There is also the potential for early obsolescence or a dead-ended upgrade path. Should you decide any time in the future that you want to try another or a different mic, unless you get yet another USB mic, you'll be back to square one as far as deciding upon and getting a more conventional signal path for your microphone. Plus your old PG27 would be incompatable with that new signal path.

What I might personally recommend (IMHO only) at least considering as an alternative in your general price range would be a Tascam US122L interface, which will give you *two* rather decent quality microphone preamps for the price, two instrument inputs (room for future expansion) and USB output to your PC in one box the size of a paperback book. You can get them new for $149, used in mint condition on eBay for $99 or less. Then with the remaining balance, get a fairly decent microphone.

Now, recommending mics as a very subjective and emotional issue for which everybody has a different opinion, but to throw out a few general recommendations in the $300-350 price range, I'd recommend one of three different large diaphragm dynamics (LDDs) first, and one of two large diaphragm condensers (LDCs) second.

The LDDs would be either the Electrovoice RE20, the Sennheiser 421, or the Shure SM7. These are great all-purpose microphones that work decently with just about any source from vocals to drums (though the Sennheiser is perhaps use more often for instruments than vocals.)

For LDCs, a couple of mics to look at in the remaining range would be the Audio Technica AT 4040 and the MXL V69M.

HTH,

G.

 

[Somelsewhere]

Wow, thanks Glen for such a thoughtful response. And yes, I meant the Pg27... hence my lack of bonafide knowledge.
That mic in particular hit's shelves in a couple of days, so yes, it remains largely untested by consumers, but what I read about it in terms of functionality (zero-latency, pre-amp, direct-plug-in, headphone-monitoring, "professional quality"), all for about 200 bucks, it seemed like a sure bet.
Then again, "sure-bets" are how suckers are made, and that's why I came here seeking tested advice.

Thanks for the Tascam suggestion, I will look into it, but I can't help but feel paranoid of interfaces, because in my experience with things of the sort, they always seem to induce unwanted, discreet noise, which to my ears, drives me crazy.
The reason why getting a quality, condenser USB mic seems so attractive it that I feel like ALL I NEED, is a mic, and software to record into.
The quest right now is which mic, and which software will cater to this simplicity without loss of sound quality.

Then again, I am fully aware of naivety, and if this isn't the best course, financially and musically, then please tell me.
I just know that acoustic artists like Bon Iver put out amazing albums with the use of a couple of SM57's and a single recording device,
which gives me hope, false or not. (he did after all have his cd mastered in the end...)

Thanks for your input.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

but I can't help but feel paranoid of interfaces, because in my experience with things of the sort, they always seem to induce unwanted, discreet noise, which to my ears, drives me crazy.

BTW, I forgot to say, welcome to the board .

The thing to keep in mind here, Some (can I call you Some? ), is that the USB mic is nothing more than a mic with the interface built-in. The only thing that "shorter" or "more direct" is the length of the signal connection between the microphone circuitry itself and the rest of the interface. There's simply no avoiding the "interface", it's just a question of whether it's stuck inside the microphone body or in it's own separate container.

When I hear that it's got a street price equal to or less than the price of a decent microphone without the interface, and is about the retail price of a decent quality entry-level interface without any microphone, it throws me even more caution. Sure Shure is saving some cost by putting it all in one box, but not that much.

Yeah, there are some cheap interfaces that are noisy and/or have poor quality converters, or both, and are not the best-sounding things in the world. But I have used this Tascam in the past to record, of all things, a stereo recording of a Baldwin grand piano. Matched up with a halfway-decent stereo microphone, I actually got some pretty admirable results.

And as far as software, the Tascam (as with many other interfaces) comes bundled with Cubase LE, which is a perfectly fine recording and mixing software package for your situation.

The only reason I am spending so much time on this subject is because of your expressed desire for a quality "pure" and low-noise sound, and I think that an all-in-one solution at a bargain price would at best be a gamble.

Look, you could always buy one from a reputable dealer and try it out. If it works out for you, excellent! If it doesn't float your boat, you can always return it or exchange it for something else.

G.

 

[Somelsewhere]

Thanks Glen, and I'm glad to have found this board, it is an excellent resource, I've learned so much in only a couple hours, it's pretty exciting to get to draw from all this personal experience.
Call me whatever, I'll look at the Tascam, sounds like something basic and reliable, which is what I definately look for.

 

[mjbphotos]

Note that the claims of "zero latency" for this USB mic dont' mean anything. Latency comes from the software/hardware interaction and are a function of your soundcard.
What they really mean is that the mic will introduce no MORE latency into your system than you have from existing already.

 

[Monkey Allen]

About 4 years ago I wanted to know the answers to all the same questions as you. So, to cut a long story short...I'll tell you where I ended up after my initial questions and research:

1. I had an acoustic guitar
2. Took out the SBLive! and started using the Presonus Firebox
3. Bought the CADm177 Condenser mic
4. Bought Cakewalk Guitar Tracks Pro 2

All that acted as my first basic foot in the door to gear which is a decent step up from this:

1. Guitar
2. SBLive!
3. Radio Shack mic with 1/8 jack
4. Audacity

For the first 4 years, I couldn't record a decent acoustic sound. The main problem was recording open strummed chords. I have slowly learned some things about getting good results recording the acoustic guitar...but I am a long way off.

The Presonus Firebox (4 years ago) was/ is a good little external firewire unit. It has 2 preamp channels, it's sturdy and has never failed me in any way. If you want a simple software recording option, you could try 'Reaper'...I think it's still free. I checked it out a month ago and it's great. For microphones, you're right about the condenser option....you could try the MCA SP1 which gets the nod from a lot of people (not all). It is about US$49.

 

[Richard Monroe]

Yo Somelsewhere! Welcome to the board! Everybody has their own opinions, and often the more they know, the more confusing their opinions are. You have asked 2 questions, and the answer to each depends on the answer to the other. The first one is:

How can I get a good acoustic guitar sound (and I assume, vocals) into a computer for processing?

The second is:

How do I do this for $500?

First, understand that your budget is very limited, and we're not even talking about adding additional tracks-drums, bass, etc.
I'm going to make a couple of suggestions, one of which is standard, and the other of which is a little radical. I'll start with a basic tutorial on mic'ing acoustic guitar. I did that here:

http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/sho...08#post2850508

Secondly, how do we record vocals? Usually with a single cardioid mic, which can be a condenser or a dynamic. No one can predict what mic(s) will make you sound good. They are like shoes. They either fit, or they don't.

Many people will suggest that the first thing you need to do is deal with your recording space, as a good-sounding room is essential to recording acoustic instruments. They are right, and as you don't have the budget for major room modifications, you'll need to ask a lot of questions about DIY. Ethan Winer, Massive Master, and Harvey Gerst, all on this board, are particularly knowledgable in that area.

Meanwhile, back to gear. You will need one or more mics, and the needs of acoustic guitar and vocals are not always the same. Next, you will need a preamplifier, to raise the low output of the mic(s) to line level. Note that if you want to use condenser mics, your preamp needs to provide "phantom power", which is sent back up the mic cable to power the mic.Then you need Analog to Digital (A-D) conversion, to change the analog signal to a digital signal for transfer, probably by USB or firewire. Then you will need something to listen with while you are recording, in other words, a good set of headphones. Initially, you will listen to the music coming out of the computer on your computer monitors. Later, you will probably want specialized monitors- prepare for continuing sticker shock. Of course, you will need audio processing software (you mentioned Garage Band).

OK, to do all of this as separate components, you don't have the budget, even for entry level, so some of these components will have to be combined.

First, I'll tell you how most people are doing it, and then I'll tell you how I would do it.
Most folks would start with a USB or firewire-based audio interface. There are lots by M-Audio, Presonus, Lexicon, and Line 6 in your price range. Generally, you will be advised to steer clear of Behringer and Nady gear, no matter how good the price looks. Mostly, I agree.
Here's typical model in your price range:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=12031&Category=Audio_Interfaces

OK- that gives you 2 preamps (not great ones), phantom power, and A-D conversion. For software, Audacity is free, and many people here like Reaper, which is $50, and by all accounts, is worth every penny of it. Then, I would get one cheap large diaphragm condenser mic, such as:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=6458&Category=Microphones

and perhaps a matched pair of small diaphagm condenser mics (good for acoustic guitar, but not generally used for vocals), such as:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=31442&Category=Microphones

Some folks, and some voices, prefer the sound of a cheap dynamic mic to a cheap condenser mic, and will recommend this:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=1361&Category=Microphones

I personally prefer this one, but that's just me:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=3202&Category=Microphones

Then you need some "cans" (headphones) Everybody has their favorite- I like these:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=10952&Category=Monitoring

Of course, your next step is improving your room, and getting real monitors for mixing.
OK, I did it for about $500, but my own suggestion is more radical. As time goes on, you will discover the need to *upgrade*. That 2-channel audio interface will need better preamps, better A-D conversion, more channels. Those small diaphragm condensers will start to sound cheap (they are). Those headphones and the cheap dynamic mic will never go away- you'll always find uses for them. The same goes for the V67, which isn't a bad utility condenser.

My radical suggestion is this:

http://www.8thstreet.com/product.asp?ProductCode=32943&Category=Recorders

and here's why: First, it's a USB-based interface with *4* preamps. You can use the built-in small diaphragm condensers simultaneously with any other 2 mics, and it provides phantom power. It can be used directly as an audio interface, and comes with Cubase software, or it can download WAV files that can be processed in any software you like.It also records MP3's, in a variety of resolutions, so it's good for interviews or lecture, where high quality audio reproduction is not necessary. It is portable, fits in a guitar case, and has its own onboard effects/reverb (which doesn't prevent you from using the effects in whatever software you choose). It's a metronome, a tuner. You can plug a stereo mic with a stereo miniplug into it. Check these things on ebay, and for that price, you will find them with lots of accessories, first of which is a 16gb or 32gb SD card. It comes with a 1gb card, which will need to be upgraded for longer recording times.

I believe that even after you upgrade to a real studio, a device like the H4n remains useful. It is the PDA of a recording artist, and it will initially meet all of the requirements of an entry-level audio interface. BTW, do not be sucked in by the H4n's predecessor, the H4. It's cheaper, but not as reliable or as durable, and the interface is not particularly intuitive. I would find a deal on ebay with at least a 16 gig card, and add a good pair of headphones, and a basic condenser or dynamic mic for main vocals. For the record, I started recording on a PXR4 Pandora, which is also a micro-recorder, but after several years, I have upgraded to the H4n, just because the Pandora has become obsolete. I now have close to $40,000 invested in the studio, but I still use a pocket recorder for a variety of purposes. I hope you find the right solution, however you end up doing it. Best of luck-Richie

 

[Somelsewhere]

yet again, thanks for such amazing feedback.
I see what you mean about the need to upgrade constantly, and I am by no means looking for long-term solutions.
I am just in the market to complete my acoustic project with the minimal loss of take-quality, I'm hoping if what I get down is good enough in sound, that I can just either pay for a studio, or take it upon myself, to sweeten the sound electronically.
Richard, that is probably the most in-depth response to any question I've ever received in my life, thank you so much for taking the time to fill me in details, they seem pretty crucial.
Right now I already have some pretty decent Bose headphones, and I've been using them to monitor what I record in garageband. I'm still confused as to why I would need to invest in monitors, if I can isolate the sound and hear it only in my headphones, both for real-time monitoring, and for playback, then isn't that enough?
As for software, would you recommend Reaper over such programs as Cubase, Cakewalk, and the like?
Your radical suggestion, atleast to a newbie like me with no prior knowledge , seems just as normal as any other technical suggestion. I like the idea of a portable recording device, I myself record ideas onto my cell phone constantly, but I love the luxury of a computer-software interface which really makes it easy to manipulate recorded music.

I think all I need is a single high-quality condenser because as for drums, the kind of percussion I would add to my music would be sparse, as it relies on rhythm mostly from just guitar, and I would probably just mic one drum-piece at a time and just mesh all those takes together.

I'm sure I'm limiting myself, but I've seen alot of people go down the endless tech-amassing road where there is an obsession with just getting as much gear as possible in preparation of making music, only to wait years to try and record the music they wanted in the first place.
I'm okay with limiting myself for now, I need the fastest way to just get results.

Thank you so much for the input.

 

[Richard Monroe]

Yo Somelsewhere!

OK, the Bose cans should be fine for now. Add a V67 condenser, a mic cable, and a mic stand to the H4n and you are good to go. As to why you need monitors, consider this- There is no possible way you can hear something in your right ear, without also hearing it in your left ear, unless you are wearing cans. Also, the small drivers in headphones cause you to crank up the bass. Monitoring in headphones is fine. Mixing with cans is a bad choice. It allows you to create mixes that couldn't exist in the real world, like an acoustic version of an M.C. Esher drawing, and that blow your head off with bass when put through real speakers. You want your mixes to translate to a radio broadcast? Don't mix with headphones. Here's a start-

https://homerecording.com/monitors.html

Don't worry about that for a while. Eventually, you'll get the need for monitors. While it *is* critical, there are only so many things you can do at once, and with a $500 budget. First, you need to get the ability to record *something*. Then we'll begin to deal with mixing.-Richie

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

It allows you to create mixes that couldn't exist in the real world, like an acoustic version of an M.C. Esher drawing, and that blow your head off with bass when put through real speakers.

LOL Richie, I love the M.C. Escher simile! . Also, I just wanted to give you props for your contributions to this thread in general. The stingy BBS won't let me rep you again just yet (call this an IOU.)

G.

 

[Richard Monroe]

Thank you for you kind words, SSGlen! All of this is a project that has been growing in my head, a tutorial on basic recording techniques, which I don't know whether it will be a BLOG, a video, or a book. Maybe because I started out on a little card recorder, I've become convinced that it is a good place to start with a limited budget. The newest ones are truly amazing. Why would I want a small USB interface, when I can have a small USB interface with comparable preamps that has built in mics, runs on batteries, does 4 simultaneous tracks, and is a completely portable recording system?
My little PXR4 Pandora has found bizzillions of uses in the studio over the years. It's a preamp for a talkback mic, a metronome (much more pleasant to listen to than the clicks in the plugins I have), a tuner. I was at a Reggae concert when the reverb on the main PA went out. I took an EB Tech line level shifter, converted the main line out of the board to -10, ran it through the FX section of the Pandora, ran it back to the line level shifter, converted back to +4, and ran it straight to the power amp. The Pandora does stereo out anyway, so we fed both sides of the power amp, and used the Pandora for a reverb unit for an 8000 watt PA! The band bought one the next day. And the Pandora's capabilities are nothing compared with the current SONY and Zoom units. I've become a believer in the mobile microstudio as the scratchpad for a recording artist, and it's really not a bad way to get started recording. That is even more true now that they make WAV files, and allow for post production processing , or even direct recording, to a full size computer or a lap top.-Richie

 

[Somelsewhere]

wow Richard, that story is like the first "sound engineer badass moment" tale I've yet heard, cool stuff.

So here are my options :

go with the pandora.

or

Buy a really good condensor (There is the new Shure Pg27.
I'm looking at this Shure Ksm27 for 200$
from G-center, would provide link, but dunno how to right click on my sister's damn mac
Marshall v67,
CADm177,
AT 4040,
MXL V69....)

Interface- none if I go with Pg27, but I'm pretty convinced that I need a basic setup like the Tascam Glen suggested.

Software- the Cubase bundled with the Tascam, Reaper, ???

Also, my roommate has an SM57

and my dad has two pencil-condensors,
both would let me mess around with their equipment,

another detail is that my acoustic is a Taylor and has their pickup setup built-in, so if the Tascam has a guitar input, I coukld get an even richer acoustic sound when paired with condensor mics.

What is the purest, simplest, (best) option out of these?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Software- the Cubase bundled with the Tascam, Reaper, ???

Both are fine programs and either one would suit you just fine. Reaper is a *bit* nicer and more capable than the version of Cubase that comes with most interfaces, but in technical and capacity ways that may not be readily appreciable by an entry-level user.

As to whether it would be worth the extra $50 for Reaper right off the bat, especially for someone on a limited budget, IMHO is questionable at best. (Yes you can download the app and use it for free if you wish, but they do ask for $50 on the honor system. As a software developer myself, I would urge anyone to pay the measly $50 [the price of one date with your wife or girlfriend at the movies] because the developers have more than *earned* it.)

If you do go the interface route, I'd hold off on the Reaper - at least out of the gate - and use the extra $50 instead towards as good of a microphone as you can afford; the mic will make more of a difference in the quality of your sound than anything else in your signal chain, whereas any technical differences between the recording/editing software will have only the most minimal, if any at all, impact on your actual sound.

And if/when in the future you decide that changing your editing software would be to your advantage, you can always get it then after you've saved up an extra $50 and gotten a bit more practice and experience under your belt; no harm, no loss and no foul.

G.

 

[Richard Monroe]

See, Somelsewhere, you just made my point. The simplest solution? The H4n. You can set one of the 1/4" inputs for "instrument", plug the Taylor into it, and use the onboard stereo condensers, record as a WAV file in 24 bit/96 khz or 16bit/44.1 khz, and mix in cubase. Or, you can plug those pencil mics into the Zoom and see how they sound. Or, you can plug the Taylor into a 1/4" in, and run your vocal mic into an XLR, and record a stereo mix with the onboard mics as well. Frankly, I'd do it simpler. I'd just record the acoustic with the onboard stereo mics, and then overdub the vocals with a single outboard mic, and then mix in cubase.

For the record, the Pandora is an older, now obsolescent unit. Although very cool in it's time, it only has one omni onboard mic, so to record in stereo, you have to use an outboard stereo mic. It has no XLR ins, and no phantom power, although you can set the 1/4" in for use with a dynamic mic. It also records only 2 tracks at a time. Third, it uses Smart Media cards, which are pretty much gone, which max out at 128kb. That allows for only 90 track minutes in high resolution. That's 45 minutes in stereo, or 22.5 minutes if you use all 4 tracks. Lastly, and perhaps most limiting- Although the Pandora has a USB port, it can only download in MP2- an uncompressed format, and doesn't allow for post-production processing in a real computer. Although a real cool unit in it's period, the current units are vastly more versatile.

Any way you slice it, a decent 2 channel USB interface costs about $100, and an entry level pair of small diaphragm condensers costs $200. A basic large diaphragm vocal mic is about $100.
That's how most people do it, and that's why I laid out that scenario first. The H4n has 4 primary advantages, and one primary disadvantage. It's advantages are:
It can record 4 tracks at once, not 2
It is self-contained, and portable
It has it's own memory, by SD cards, so you don't need a computer to use it. You can take the SD card out of it, feed it to the card reader in a laptop, and mix in any software you want
It comes with its own software, which is compatible with lots of other gear.

This, as I see it, is the only significant disadvantage:

Because it is self contained, if the unit malfunctions, the whole system is down. If your interface bites, your system is also down, but you still have mics. I don't see that as a big disadvantage, because your Tascam interface or whatever can die just like any other piece of gear.

The only way I think you get to upgrade from a system like the H4n is when you make the investment in more than 4 simultaneous recording channels, when you invest in better preamps, or better mics. None of that is supported by your current budget. And when and if you get that budget, your interface will become a cheap item to try and sell at a loss, and a unit like the H4n will still be a mobile recorder, and a notepad for a recording artist on the road. When I'm in a motel at night, I can plug in a solid body, dial up some amp models, and plink away. If I'm walking down the beach, and I hear a cool steel band, I set it down, hit record, and burn it to CD later. At home, I use it for click tracks and as a preamp for the talkback mic. I can take a line out, plug it into the aux in of my headphone amp, plug a cheap dynamic into it, and I get my talkback outside of the recording loop, and without using up a perfectly good channel. For the entry level user, at home, it's an interface/preamp and a pair of mics.

One point- if you use the H4n as a primary interface, and you use the onboard mics a lot, it really helps to have the remote control card, which is $40 or so by itself. I got my H4n on ebay, $350 brand new with warranty, with the remote control card, a 16gb SD card, the AC/DC convertor, wind screen, USB cable, tripod,cubase software, and the hard plastic case. After 5 years of use without a problem, I gave the Pandora to a buddy of mine who fell in love with it.-Richie

 

[Somelsewhere]

wow, Richard, you should really look into sales, because right now I feel as if I'm shooting myself in the foot if I don't go with the H4N, I guess my discrepancy with it was simply that I didn't understand it, and you went far beyond the call of duty to lay it down for me. Thank you.
Plus a unit like that would make a lot of sense for my dorm room.
Still I would like some advice on a really good single condenser, because as that is the first link in my chain, it is my biggest emphasis right now.
Should I get the Shure KSM27? It's priced fairly well, (199$ new), and everything I've heard about the KSM series has been really positive.
Advice?

 

[Richard Monroe]

I've never used the KSM27, but I've used the KSM44 extensively, which is a higher-end multi-pattern mic in the same series. Shure is a respected company, and you could probably do a lot worse. There are a ton of entry-level condenser mics out there. I like CAD M179, because it has omnidirectional and figure-8 options, as well as cardioid, and doesn't have the hyped midrange which is often a feature of Chinese condensers. I like Marshall Electronics MXL V67G for the same reason- it's cheap, without the hyped midrange. The KSM27 is a little pricier, and probably works well, like the rest of the KSM series. Here's the only hitch, and it has *nothing* to do with that mic:

Vocal mics are personal things, and there isn't one of them, including main vocal mics costing thousands of dollars, that works for everybody. All that you can do is buy mics that work for *somebody*, and are made by respected manufacturers. That way, if they don't work out for you, they are easier to resell. Also, even if a well made vocal mic doesn't turn out to be the vocal mic you need, you may find it is excellent for recording *something*. I've got a few "vocal" mics that I mostly use for violin, or piano, or-something. I think the KSM27 is a perfectly good choice on both counts. It has as good a chance of being the vocal mic for *you* as any other mic in it's price range, it is made by a respected manufacturer, and I bet it's good for recording *something*. It therefore meets all of my criteria for a good mic. Is it "better" than the cheaper alternatives? Probably, most of the time, unless one of those cheaper mics is the shoe that fits. No one can really predict that, so if you have the budget, I think it's a good choice.

BTW, you mentioned a dorm room. Been there, done that. As a rule, there is no more obnoxious and challenging recording space on earth, although the stair wells at about 2AM will give you some hellish natural reverb. At some point early on, you will probably want a standard dynamic stage mic, which will be more forgiving about background noise and room reflections than a studio condenser. That KSM27 will give you some very accurate recordings of the people walking on your ceiling. Search your campus for a good practice room to record. If you have a music department, they may be helpful there. That's another reason for a portable rig. You can take your guitar, your cans, and the recorder, and set up in the best acoustic space you can find, and tear down in under 60 seconds, and walk out with the entire rig in a laptop bag, or smaller.

If you find the need for that dynamic, most folks here will recommend Shure SM57/SM58. This is basically the same mic, but the SM58 has a ball top with a thin foam wind screen/pop filter that doesn't do much. If you go that route, find a used SM57. They are usually about $50, and pretty much never die. That said, I hate the thing. Why? Nothing wrong with the mic whatsoever. It's the shoe that *doesn't* fit-me. It makes my voice sound awful anytime, anywhere. It makes lots of other people sound just fine. Go figure. I use Sennheiser e835 or AKG D770 for that application.

High end dynamics can be very attractive, because while the best condenser mics in the world cost thousands, the best dynamics are a hell of a lot cheaper. There are a number of dynamics that are pretty cheap used that work very well, by Electrovoice and Beyer Dynamic. I really don't know them well, because I haven't gotten to use them. Other people on this board can fill you in on them. As far as the ones I've used, there are only 4 that matter- Shure SM7/SM7b (same mic, different armature, minor differences in electronics), Electrovoice RE20, Sennheiser MD421, and Sennheiser MD441. The SM7 and RE20 are big mucking radio broadcast mics that sound different, but they both sound wonderful. They both require a *lot* of gain from the preamp, and the SM7, the cheaper of the 2, is worse in that respect. The gain required would tax the limits of the H4n, or any other cheap interface, beyond the breaking point. When you crank up cheap preamps, it virtually always involves an unacceptable noise floor.

The MD441 is the most expensive of the lot, and sounds more like a condenser than a dynamic. It's a great mic, but is so sensitive, that I think it would not meet your needs, even if it was within your current budget, which it's not. I'm left with the MD421, the cheapest of all 4 used or new, and a proven studio workhorse for many years. It's a main live vocal mic for lots of folks, including the Grateful Dead, among others, and the big studios it on guitar cabs, percussion, and horns. I consider it the mic the SM57 *wishes* it was.

In conclusion, given your working budget, and your acoustic situation, I'd say- go ahead and get that KSM27, bit be advised that you'll be looking for acoustic spaces where you can use it without unacceptable background noise. As early as possible, grab a used SM57 or e835. Then save up your pennies a little, and spook around ebay or Craig's List for a used MD421. I'm betting that with the onboard stereo mics on the H4n, the KSM27, and an MD421, there's almost nothing and almost no place you can't record. Best of luck. Let us all know how it all works out.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

High end dynamics can be very attractive, because while the best condenser mics in the world cost thousands, the best dynamics are a hell of a lot cheaper. There are a number of dynamics that are pretty cheap used that work very well, by Electrovoice and Beyer Dynamic. I really don't know them well, because I haven't gotten to use them. Other people on this board can fill you in on them. As far as the ones I've used, there are only 4 that matter- Shure SM7/SM7b (same mice, different armature, minor differences in electronics), Electrovoice RE20, Sennheiser MD421, and Sennheiser MD441. The SM7 and RE20 are big mucking radio broadcast mics that sound different, but they both sound wonderful. They both require a *lot* of gain from the preamp, and the SM7, the cheaper of the 2, is worse in that respect. The gain required would tax the limits of the H4n, or any other cheap interface, beyond the breaking point. When you crank up cheap preamps, it virtually always involves an unacceptable noise floor.

I'm happy you included these, Richard, because I feel that these are the best yet most underrated class of microphone for home recordists or those who need the most bang for the buck. Three of the four mics you mentioned were on my recommended list; the only reason I didn't mention the 441 was because it was too expensive for the OPs budget (though arguably the finest mic of the bunch.) BTW, these aren't just "high end" dynamics, but they are all large-diameter dynamics (LDDs), one of the engineering traits that sets them apart from the SM57-class of dynamic.

Personally I like to recommend the EV RE20 as one of the best mics that the beginning home recordist who has to start with only one mic could choose. It is a workhorse that may not be the best mic for everything, but can be used for just about anything with serviceable results (unlike many condensers which may sound great for one application but might be lousy for another). I've used and seen used RE-20s for everything from a capella vocals to kick drums. It's not a U47 on vocals, perhaps, and not a D112 on kick, but it can deliver a fine sound in both applications. It's this robustness of task that makes it an excellent low-budget candidate, IMHO. Similar things could be said about the SM7 and the 421.

You mention the low current of these mics. I don't have a lot of experience tracking with the SM7, TBH, but with the RE20 and the 421, I would say that as long as you have a relatively decent preamp that can provide 60-65dB of gain, you should be OK. Additionally the RE20 does have a variable impedance capability (via simple internal mod) that can help in the gain dept.

G.

 

[Richard Monroe]

I hear you, SSGlen, and I my experience is that most preamps in the OP's price range do a lot better if you don't ask then for more than about 50db of gain. The MD421 can live with that, and is closest to the working budget. BTW, I think the RE20 is *better* on kick than a D112, but it is also in a whole different price range. The problem is, if I had an RE20, I'd be using it on so many other things, that it would probably never get put up for kick.-Richie