The New Tone Thread

If the low end weren't so flubby, I'd like the Plexi mode clip better. It has more depth to the sound IMO. But that low end is too much in that clip. The 80s seems to be a more balanced recording, but the tone seems a little fizzier and more compressed.
 
Greg_L said:
If the low end weren't so flubby, I'd like the Plexi mode clip better. It has more depth to the sound IMO. But that low end is too much in that clip. The 80s seems to be a more balanced recording, but the tone seems a little fizzier and more compressed.
Click to expand...

Yeah man, like I mentioned when I posted those 2 comparison clips, they aren't the best sounding clips in the world to say the least, I just put everything on 5 except the gain/vol (and the resonance, I've actually pretty much stopped using that knob on both my amps for recording, live it would add some punch though...) so both would be equal comparing the power tubes...

That amp does get flubby in the low-end when it's wound up with lots of gain, but I can dial it out with eq & gain adjustments....Believe it or not, it gets even flubbier with the gain(s) & volume knobs wound on up, but not much, all 3 of 'em were on 8...

When I get the trimmer mod done, I'll make some better clips to show how much it affects the sound. To be honest, I've never really messed with that thing because it's inside the amp, & I'm actually kinda stoked to hear what difference it'll make...

oops, sorry man I just realized you were talking about the 2nd set of clips, but it's the same thing, the gain knobs were wound up too high...
 
I like both of those Minerman. The 80s reminds me of my 2204 with the pre-amp all the way up quite a bit - maybe a little fizzier on the top, or actually mine had that same sound before I pulled the bright cap. That's a nice amp you have.

How did you place the e609? I have one of those and I can't seem to do much with it - maybe it's just my particular mic, but it's really thin and buzz saw-y. Now that I'm in the re-amping business I gotta get my act together.
 
Schwarzenyaeger said:
The e609 isn't particularly low end heavy. I find it articulates high gain sounds in a way. Makes them more defined.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My 609 is not much for low end. It's pretty neutral down there and the highs are very present because the mids are also pretty mild. It's not my favorite mic, but it'll do.
 
antichef said:
I like both of those Minerman. The 80s reminds me of my 2204 with the pre-amp all the way up quite a bit - maybe a little fizzier on the top, or actually mine had that same sound before I pulled the bright cap. That's a nice amp you have.

How did you place the e609? I have one of those and I can't seem to do much with it - maybe it's just my particular mic, but it's really thin and buzz saw-y. Now that I'm in the re-amping business I gotta get my act together.
Click to expand...
Thanks man, I love my amp, it can go from warm, clean stuff to twangy light crunch to ultra-gain, with just the guitar plugged in...I highly recommend this thing, & just guessing, I'd say all Ceriatone amps are pretty good, although this is the only one I've ever played through...

Since you asked, here's a pic of where the mic was for all the clips yesterday:





I took a Sharpie & marked where the cap/center of the speaker is on the grillcloth so I can just throw a mic up & get in the ballpark pretty quick...The marks aren't exactly centered on the cap of the speakers, but they're close enough for me, & it does help IMO...


Schwarzenyaeger said:
The e609 isn't particularly low end heavy. I find it articulates high gain sounds in a way. Makes them more defined.
Click to expand...
I find this mic is kinda sizzly/fizzy at times, but it does blend really well with the '57, using it in a dark placement & the '57 in the usual cap meets cone thing...

Greg_L said:
Agreed. My 609 is not much for low end. It's pretty neutral down there and the highs are very present because the mids are also pretty mild. It's not my favorite mic, but it'll do.
Click to expand...
I've actually been spending a lot of time with this mic the past little while, & I'm starting to really like it, but I'd still take the '57 over it if I had to choose....

​
 
@minerman:

I find it interesting that you find that 609 fizzy when you use a 57 otherwise. The 57 was quite a lot "snazzier" in the top end when I did A/B comparisons of the same reamp.
 
I'm not seeing how a dynamic mic can even be 'fizzy' ...... all they can do is capture the sound coming outta the speakers. Any 'fizziness' is going to be from there.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I'm not seeing how a dynamic mic can even be 'fizzy' ...... all they can do is capture the sound coming outta the speakers. Any 'fizziness' is going to be from there.
Click to expand...

I think they mean that 57s are more sensitive to capturing or enhancing the fizz that is already there. I think it's true. If your tone is kind of fizzy, a 57 will reveal it bigtime. Some other mics are more forgiving in the high end.
 
Greg_L said:
I think they mean that 57s are more sensitive to capturing or enhancing the fizz that is already there. I think it's true. If your tone is kind of fizzy, a 57 will reveal it bigtime. Some other mics are more forgiving in the high end.
Click to expand...

I think that's true as well. I had the damndest time dialing in a tone because the second I'd turn up the treble or presence, the 57 would pick up too much of the hi frequency grit. So all of my distorted guitar tracks came out dead sounding because I'd dial out the highs to get rid of the grit.

I absolutely love my Audix i5, it was a game changer for my distorted tones. I still love the SM57 on a clean Fender amp, but I've moved to the i5 for dirty tones.
 
I find with a 57 you really have to nail the position on the speaker...and then it's really good.

609 to me is just too thunky..which may be perfect for a thinner, lows-light amp/cab situation...and also why people like them on toms.
 
Minerman - that's very helpful - thanks - it's 'touching cloth'? (hah - it's only mine that sounds like something that would be touching cloth - yours sounds great).

I think I'm gonna do a big reamped mic shootout here in the next couple of weeks, at volume.
 
antichef said:
Minerman - that's very helpful - thanks - it's 'touching cloth'? (hah - it's only mine that sounds like something that would be touching cloth - yours sounds great).

I think I'm gonna do a big reamped mic shootout here in the next couple of weeks, at volume.
Click to expand...
Actually it's not man, but it's about as close as I can get without it touching the grillcloth....

Post the re-amp clips if you can, I'd like to hear 'em myself...
 
Lt. Bob.
I don't like 57 either. I have one and use it but prefer the e609 as well as an old no name dynamic called a L'Grange.
I'm such a soft brain that I use the 57 but try not to blend it in if I can avoid it.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I don't like 57s very much for anything actually.

I'm an EV man.
Click to expand...

My favorite live vocal mic was an EV PL95 that I bought back in the 80s. It worked great for guitar as well until it finally crapped out. I've tried the N/D 267a and N/D 767a but they just don't sound as nice as the PL95. The newer EV mics that I've tried have a very heavy proximity effect which can be overbearing.
 
ocnor said:
My favorite live vocal mic was an EV PL95 that I bought back in the 80s. It worked great for guitar as well until it finally crapped out. I've tried the N/D 267a and N/D 767a but they just don't sound as nice as the PL95. The newer EV mics that I've tried have a very heavy proximity effect which can be overbearing.
Click to expand...
the Cobalt 7's make a great guitar mic and they're cheaper than a 57.

For live work the 767's are my favorite stage mic of all. Well, actually an older 747 was my fav but it's no longer made and the 767 is close.
Super high output before feedback ..... I mean WAY higher than a 57 which is awesome for live. I almost don't know what feedback is anymore.

Every time a house guy sticks my mic in his PA he has to dial the level way back from where he had it for Shure mics.

And it does have a great proximity effect but that's very useful for vocals live although, as you point out, bad for guitar unless you keep it back from the speaker or really want a lot of bottom end.
I do some Barry White and other deep voice stuff and it's really nice to just get up close to the mic and watch the panties start to loosen.
:D
 
I want to get my hands on one of the Audix i5's. It sounds like i could benefit from one based on Tadpuis reply a few posts back. I sort of have the same issue. If i try to notch out the fizz entirely i lose some of the life breath of the tone. I might start looking for one this week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top