If you had to, could you produce a solid recording with a single $100 mic?

J

jeffree

New member
A strange little question, I know, prompted by my recent reading of Behind the Glass by Howard Massey...

There's so much discussion here about small differences between various mics, and so many pros talk about the high quality they've produced (particularly 20-30 years ago) with sub-par gear, and I'm trying to gain some context for the many opinions expressed in these threads.

*********************
A QUESTION FOR THE MORE EXPERIENCED AMONG US:
If, on a bet, you had to produce a solid entire-group recording with just one $100 mic (an MXL, SP, SM57, etc.), could you do it? Could you effectively find a way to adapt the single signal for various uses? I'm not interested in which particular mic (we've seen enough bickering about this issue), but more in the general response to the question: could you produce a recording you'd be proud of if limited to just one cheap mic for all instruments and voices?
***********************

Just hypothetically musing,

J.
 
I think you could produce a decent enough recording with an EV 635a. It'd definitely have a certain vibe.
 
I mastered a recording last summer that was written and recorded in 24 hours with only one mic and one amp used on both guitar and bass overdubs. The same musician played every instrument. He played drums however he felt like, then overdubbed bass and guitar- writing all melodic parts of the song to the drum tracks.

For one mic and one amp, it sounded pretty cool.
 
No doubt

No doubt in my mind someone could produce a solid recording with a single $100 mic. The music might not be able to be very complex (with too many different types of instruments and stuff). Effective mic placement and technique, as well as effective use and technique of the rest of the recording chain will make a nice recording. I am determined to make some solid recordings with a couple $100-range mics and a few excellent musicians. If there's a will and skill, there's a way.

Peace,
Craig
 
I agree with mastac.

However, I'm not so sure this is a fair question. If (like the 50s & 60s) you only had a limited amount of mics and only knew of those mics, how would you know if it's solid or not? I guess what I'm saying is.

Are we talking Consumer solid recording (ie finished product) or a professional studio solid recording (much better than anything any consumer will hear). Either way, you are not going to know how joe shmoes studios recording sound in the studio (unless you are there), and the level of quality the consumer gets (via radio, CD, tape, mp3) is pretty much all the same. I mean can you tell if Maroon 5, Brittney Spears, Snoop Dog, (Your artists), etc recorded with a Ribbon Mic or an SM57 based on what you hear on the radio? The biggest difference you hear is the mixing engineer's effects, and the mastering engineer's capabilities.

As a hypothetical question my hypothetical answer is yes! I believe that someone with even a $50 mic can get a solid recording in a professional studio. Enough EQ, compression, good pre-amps, dubbing, mic positioning, room acoustics, blah, blah, blah. The best that could be had with that one mic, anyway.

Just my $0.1 worth.
 
jeffree said:
*********************
A QUESTION FOR THE MORE EXPERIENCED AMONG US:
If, on a bet, you had to produce a solid entire-group recording with just one $100 mic (an MXL, SP, SM57, etc.), could you do it? Could you effectively find a way to adapt the single signal for various uses? I'm not interested in which particular mic (we've seen enough bickering about this issue), but more in the general response to the question: could you produce a recording you'd be proud of if limited to just one cheap mic for all instruments and voices?
Click to expand...

I could not produce a solid recording with any amount of gear. I have, however, managed to produce many lousy recordings using a single mic, or even with multiple cheap mics. Of course, you pose your question to, "the more experienced among us," which takes me out of the equation, entirely. Plus, I don't gamble. :D


















Oh, and everyone should buy the 57 and an audio buddy. There is no finer signal chain known to man. End of discussion. :p
 
The Americans say 'it's the indian, not the arrow' right?

A while ago there was a C1000 bashing thread at PSW and I made a pretty strong statement to all the bashers by saying: a really good and skilled engineer can make a Grammy winning record with a couple of C1000's.

Boy, you should have read the responses I got from some so called pro's!

Untill Slipperman came along (I know who he is) and said: guys, you're pissing to the wrong tree. And the discussion went 180 deg the other direction after slipperman had explained about who I am, or more what I am.

Bottom line is that a skilled engineer can make a very good sounding recording with V67, B1, or MD421 mics and even C1000's.

Yesterday a couple of guys were listening in the trackingroom to Beethoven's 9th by von Karajan through a Luxman CD player with tubes, a Luxman A371 amp and a pair of IMF RSPM monitors (freq response 17hz-40khz).

Needless to say it sounded awesome. There was a discussion on a Dutch hifi forum about how great the Diane Krall CD 'The look of love' sounds. So yesterday we played that CD on a couple of Luxman amps and various IMF monitors from which the Compact Monitor 3 is the most detailed I've ever heard.

Anyway, we compared that CD to a CD of Frank Sinatra which was recorded in the early sixties. Same kind of music, big orchestra and a vocalist. The recording of (I've said this before) 'It was a very good year' , a recording from april 22 1965, by Bill Putnam (who used to say less is much more) sounds at least a hundred times better than the CD of miss Krall.(IMO)

The stereo image of Frank S' recording is so realistic it's almost scary, the stereo image of ms Krall is an orchestra with a big hole in the middle.

Bill Putnam had a console he had made and designed himself, I guess with his famous pre's on board and he used a minimal number of mics.

Al Schmit, who recorded the Krall CD has access to multi million dollar boards and an unlimited number of great mics and an unlimited number of tracks.
Yet the Bill Putnam orchestral recordings are the best sounding ever IMHO.

It's all about talent and skill my dear friends, the mics and gear are just tools, nothing more, nothing less.
 
EleKtriKaz said:
Yeah, you could use one of Edison's big horn things...while you're at it, throw in a deaf producer/engineer like Edison.
Click to expand...


I've made at least one good recording with no mics.

All keyboards and a drum machine.

Carl
 
I've been thinking lately that it would be interesting to have "The $200 Contest" where teams of engineers/musicians would be asked to record one song using only gear that cost $200 or less. No mic, instrument, interface etc could cost more than $200. Finding the gear would be half the trouble.
 
absolutely i could make a solid recording using a single $100 mic. i've done it in the past using an SP B1 into a VTB1. a couple acoustics, some vocals and a DI'd bass = solid recording.

HOWEVER, it takes a LOT more time, effort and is generally a much bigger pain in the ass than if i have a number of mics to best fit to the sources.

mics are simply tools. sure you can use 1 tool for all of the jobs......but you can be almost assured that it won't be the best (or even right) tool for most of those jobs--even though it will work. i prefer to better suit the tool to the task--at least where i can.


YMMV,
wade
 
It's hard to say without knowing what kind of music or arrangement you're talking about.

I suppose you could do an all-accoustic kinda' thing, and it would sound fine. Accoustic guitar, voice, maybe a little tambo / shaker, etc. Pretty easy stuff.

Still ... if you're talking about a typical radio pop / rock tune, I think it would be tough. It's hard to really groove to a rock tune without a full, tight, and present kick and snare. If I didn't have the luxury of at the very least mic'ing the kick and snare individually, it would be a pretty daunting task, and in the end I'd probably be left somewhat dissatisfied with the end result. You'd pretty much have to find the absolute perfect positioning for the mic ... the drummer would have to be unusually cooperative, playing with great technique and control. And you'd have to record in a room that cooperates. Not to mention the fact that you're limited to a cheap mic.

So again ... your question was: "On a bet, could I record something I'd personally be proud of ... " and I would have to say the answer is probably "no."

Sorry. I'm just a really picky bastard when it comes to certain things. I need more than just one kind of mic in order to get done the things I need to get done. And no matter how good the drums might sound with a single mic, I'd always be thinking in the back of my head: "If only I could have mic'ed those drums the way I wanted to," and I'd never fully be proud of my work. I guess I'm just a picky bastard that way.
 
It could be the next cable TV hit. Call it "Iron Ears".

Four or Five AE's would be given a single mic and have to come up with a finished project in one hour. Japanese glitterati would judge the results at the end.
 
Han said:
It's all about talent and skill my dear friends, the mics and gear are just tools, nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...
Hear hear! Yes, I agree. Although, I prefer to have a better tool to use but then again, I'm not worthy of a master yet. I'm more like a Padawan mixing Enginfeel when it comes to recording.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top