SD vs. LD condensers as overheads?

G

geekgurl

New member
I hope you all don't mind if I ask this question as a new thread ...

I was reading the "NTKs as overheads" thread and posted a question there and then realized it's likely to be buried there ...

But the question I have stems from the observation that a lot of people use LD condensers for overheads ... I was under the impression SD condensers were best for this.

So I'm wondering, in what instances would you choose LD and in what instances would you choose SD condensers? Is it not really dependent on circumstance but rather a sound preference, like wanting to pick up more room? And if that's the case, why LDs instead of omnis? Is one type better than the other for miking a kit with only 3 or 4 mics?

Ok, maybe that's more than one question. But any insights are appreciated!

Thanks.

gg
 
Thats a pretty subjective question. You pretty much answered it yourself. It's all about preference.

LD's generally have much better low end responce so they can help fill in the low end of the drums as well as get the crisp cymbal hits.

When I read that U2 was using a SM58 as a drum overhead on 'Pop' I realized anything goes.
 
I full on think that for what Its worth If you want a warmer sounding mellow drum sound without alot of bright cymbols go with the LD. If you want bright in your face cymbols go for the sd mics.

Ive been Known to use both just to make everything bigger.
 
I agree with darrin. That has been my experience, at least....I suppose it also depends on the mics.....I mean a couple of NT1's isnt going to sound very warm overhead by any means but a couple of 603 probably will....guess there's no hard fast rules.

Like any other mic placement question, its all preference based partly on what you have and sheer chance (at least it is for me.)

So far, out of what I have, I dig the 4033 as overheads but thanks to that DAMN sonixx, I'm thinkin about getting a second NTK....or something.....damn I hat jonseing for gear:(


heylow
 
As to room sound and how much you want, remember that LD's come in omni as well as cardioid and other patterns, usually via a switch.

The deciding factors are normally color and handling of transient response. SD's tend to be more accurate, and handle transients better, but is that what you want? LD's impart their own color, and as with vocalists, that may or may not pair well with their source. For example it could soften or render crackly an already crispy cymbal sound.

As you've gathered this is not a right or wrong situation. The Beatles did some pretty nice stuff with one LD over Ringo.
-kp
 
Cool, thanks everyone. I haven't started recording drums yet for this recording (I did a 3-mic thing a year ago with C1000s and hope to do MUCH better this time -- at least I didn't actually own the C1000s :) ), but I'm waiting for my 603s to come! I can't wait to start trying stuff.

I also just got the MindPrint DI Port, which I've tried out and think it sounds really clean and full ... I'm going to be running the OHs thru this.

Woo hoo, now I'm rambling, but you all know what it's like when you get new gear to play with ... it's like Christmas!

Anyway, I might down the road try that 4033 idea ... that mic was too bright on my vox, but I can see how that color might sound very good on drums ...

Peace out,

gg
 
Keep us posted on that DI port. I am curious about using one as a pre. The only thing that scared me off was that they market it more as a DAC box. Have you used it yet?
 
hopefully someone will see this question here...

How are the 603s different in quality from the NT3? Are they brighter, harsher at all?

Or...more pleasant?
 
Hi Tex, regarding DI Port:

I've done some prelim testing of the DI Port (I just got it this last weekend and didn't have a lot of time to devote to using it). You know, I've got newbie ears and not a lot of experience with a wide range of equipment, but I think I have pretty good ears as far as newbie-types go.

All I've done so far is record three passages, in stereo, of a CD. These are test samples I picked because one was really quiet (to test low-volume for resolution/distortion), one was loud and had lots of things going on in conflicting frequencies (Hammond B3 and electric guitar, potentially muddy -- how is this replicated, with air or not was what I was trying to determine), and another one with percussion and some synth work with very fine detail in the layering of sounds in the keyboard patches used (again, muddy or detailed TBD).

I am aware this is by no means scientific. I was fully expecting not to hear much, because it's only 2 tracks, after all ... not a lot of tracks. The same CD player was used as a source for all things recorded into.

But it's the only test I had time to do. Now, I don't know if I was hearing better conversion or cleaner preamp or both, but I found the sound to be a bit better going into PT Free than I got off my friend's MBox ... they both sounded pretty open and good. I used it as a converter to record the same passages into my VS880, and the difference was very noticeable.

Again, not scientific, but considering it's a clean sound as I've determined, it will be a nice complement to the single-channel racked Neve-alike pre I have. And considering it's an external converter, I can easily use it to drastically improve "in-field" recordings I do with the VS. In short, I guess I'm saying I've found it does what I want it to do, and I'm not disappointed. And for $200 on closeout from SamAsh, no less (I ordered it on the Web about 10 days ago and at that time they had 2 left. Well, at most, 1 left, now).

BTW, the pres section of the DI Port is supposed to be the same technology as used in the Envoice ... I don't know the exact details of that, but maybe PM or email JuSumPilgrim ... he seems to know much about the product and endorses it over the DMP3 as a pre, FWIW ...
 
Geekgurl - good thread.

Just a few days ago I tried to make a recording of a drum kit with one NTK and one ECM8000 placed about two ft in front of the drum kit, and two ft above the floor. When I compared the results I was almost convinced I had mixed up the recordings, since the differences I heard was pretty much the opposite from what I had expected.

First, my ears told me there was more low end in the ECM8000. I ran it through a frequency analyzer, which showed the ECM had slightly more content in the 200hz area, and the NTK had ever so slightly more content around 70hz. I suppose the 200hz is what I percieved as more low end. (Oh, I forgot to say I have the Alesis monitor one which is a really crappy monitor. I should run these recordings throgh the Mackies at my school and see if I still hear the same). But I was surprised at how little the difference was. The kick is a 20", so it's possible that the difference would have been greater with a larger kick.

Next I found that the transients seemed more defined from the NTK. Again, the opposite of what I had expected. The difference became even more obvious when I ran the takes through a compressor with a quite slow attack. Actually all the drums sounded more defined through the NTK. The snare stood out a lot better than through the ECM. I suppose this has to do with the polar pattern, that the ECM is an omni and thus takes up more of the room which will blur things up a little.

So the question is what you want in a recording. I would normally be close micing the snare and the kick in addition to the mic(s) in front of the kit, and maybe in that context the ECM:s would do better. But I'm very seriously considering getting another NTK, or maybe some pattern 8 mic for M-S recording.

Cheers
/Henrik
 
And what about using 1 LD and 1 SD? Like a C1 and a 603s
Does this make any sense to you?

It's not because I own those two...:p
 
The D.I. Port . . .

Just a little info. on the d.i. port:

The D.I. port has 2 class-A pres - the same as the Envoice.

They are very high-impedence as far as pres go. What this means is you'll get a bit of a high-end boost when using them on most condenser mics. Some people mistake this for greater high-end detail, when in fact it is the equivalent of a shelving eq starting at around 1 or 2 K.

If you decide to bypass the A/D converters, they're great just for the pres alone, but only if you've got a sound card with unbalanced inputs (mine has mostly unbalanced RCA).
 
Hmm. if I understand Henrik correctly, the ECM's would do fine, when you're already close-micing kick and snare?
Right now I only have a sm57 and a e609. the 609 could work fine on the lower rack-tom and floortom. This summer I'm gonna buy 1 LD/MD condenser (AT 4033, C1 or NT1000) and I could use that one for the kick. Add the 2 ECM's as OH, and I could get some great drum-results, right?

I'm a bit weary to use more than 4 or 5 mic's on drums, 'coz of phase-problems, and additional hassle...
Any thoughts here, folks?
 
Speeddemon,
the ECM:s worked fine as the only mics, but the snare was a lot more apparent though the NTK. I have to point out that the drums I have aren't very good, and particularly the snare should be exchanged.

So for the kit I have, in the room I have, I would add a mic on the snare, and I'd probably also want one on the kick - at least for any music that needs a firm beat. I'm not sure I would use close mics for a jazz band or say Belle and Sebastian (if they should decide to use my studio).

So where exactly is the Dutch-Polish border? The litte strip of land called Germany?:D

Cheers
/Henrik
 
Henrik said:


So where exactly is the Dutch-Polish border? The litte strip of land called Germany?:D
Cheers
/Henrik
Click to expand...
Something like that, yes... ;)
but then again, do YOU know the exact location of "Jerkoffski"? :p
 
Yes! You've found it! It's the capital of Liechtenstein! ;)
No, but seriously, I'm half dutch, half polish. That's why...

Randy, for what would you use that TB1 then? Kick, or overheads?
 
Speedmeister,I meant it as an alternative to the LD/MD mics you mentioned you were looking at.I should've been a little clearer(after all this is a drum thread)but you mentioned the AT 4033,SP C1 and the NT1000 and I thought I'd throw another choice in there for you.

I haven't used the TB-1 extensively yet but I couldn't believe how nice it sounded on a female singer that came by the other night.It also was the best I've heard on my voice(in my limited experience)but my voice still sucks big time.Think Budweiser frogs after they've inhaled some helium balloons,that would be almost as bad as my voice.:D I tracked the girl with the TB-1 on her voice and I put a SD on her guitar,when I went to mix,I noticed something on the guitar track that I didn't like so I just used the TB-1 track.I was surprised at how well the TB-1 had picked up the guitar and how good it sounded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top