Small vs. Large Diaphragm

F

fiddler4

New member
All of the commonly-recommended mics are large-diaphragm, but I read that smaller diaphragm can be better for instruments, because of the definition in the high frequencies and faster response (or something like this!) and larger pickup area. I'll be recording fiddle, tin whistle, and cello, perhaps guitar. Never vocals.

How much does diaphragm size matter, at this price point, for this application? Is diaphragm size more icing on the cake for if I get a better setup and can spend more on mics, or a major factor now?

From reading around here it seems like the MXL V67g is widely renowned in the <$200 range and generally a good starting mic to use, but perhaps not for this application?

Thanks for your tips here.
 
There is a good/long sticky on diaphragm size. Typically small does not flatter vocals, and large booms on acoustic instruments. Most people start with an LDC because they're usually better for vocals and not so bad for acoustic instruments. An SDC would be better for acoustics, but probably suck for vocals. So it's a trade off if you can only get one.

I've started using Ribbons (Fat Head) and it sounds really nice on acoustics, amps, drum overheads (which I've only heard never done with ribbons), and not too bad on vocals. So $175 for a Fat Head might be a nice compromise if you can't afford an LDC and SDC. My LDCs are still better for vocals, but the Fat Heads are decent.

I have never used either, but lots of people like MXL 603 (SDC) and MXL V67g (LDC). You could get a pair of 603's and a V67g for around $200 I think. So that might also be a good place to start. Again, I am not recommending them because I have never used them. Search and look for opinions.

But, read the sticky and decide what is going to work best for you. My recommendations work best for me, but you might not like them too much.
 
The MXL V67g can be found on the net with a google search for $89. all day long.

What have you got for a microphone selection now?
For not everything is written in stone for microphone selection on different sound sources. For instance you may find that a plan old SM57 dynamic microphone will work just great at capturing the tin whistle. etc.,etc.

I believe Jim Lad records those instruments frequently and will be able to give great insight to this, I'm sure he'll be along shortly and chime in.

But a big heads up for you is that there is a pair of Blue Bluebird LDCs microphones in the "free ads for music/recording equipment" forum here at HR.com take a look. He (darnold) is only asking $400. for the pair!!!
 
Last edited:
Typically the rules are: Small/medium diaphragm mics are better for accuracy, LDC's tend to be more forgiving & musical the larger the pressure gradient is (and the transducer type). A bunch of variables influence that. Transformer vs. transformer-less (more/less coloration) and the components within determining distortions or linearity. So really its all about the sound you are looking for. Some LDC's work just fine for instruments and in some cases produce better results. Then again a SDC can produce a more transparent sound.

You can use the right mic to flatter or complement a harsh sounding instrument, but a really good sounding instrument should do exceptionally well with a very accurate mic.

Experiment and find what works. For me, recording a bright instrument like fiddle, trumpet, saxophone would make me reach for something that would mellow the high end, but a well made acoustic would make me reach for something transparent and accurate. A dull nylon guitar would make me want something like a C12 to brighten it up.

YMMV
 
As a generalization between the 2 types there's some good points brought up here.

It would be interesting to see more questions along the lines of what mics will help to go after a certain type of sound. Type (LDC, SDC etc...) is irrelevant to a point.

Mics can be flat or hyped. Phasey and wonky or smooth. Fast and detailed or thick and in your face. Bright. Dark. Omni. Hypercardioid. Prone to popping and sibilance. Easier to EQ. Versatile. Detailed, forward and clear in the lower midrange but not muddy. Excessively hyped and harsh in the high frequencies. Delicate or bullet proof.

To me this has more to do with the mic itself than whether or not it's a large diaphragm or small diaphragm or even a condenser at all.
 
moresound said:
What have you got for a microphone selection now?
For not everything is written in stone for microphone selection on different sound sources. For instance you may find that a plan old SM57 dynamic microphone will work just great at capturing the tin whistle. etc.,etc.
Click to expand...

+1

The SM57 should not be overlooked as a starting point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top