Microphone Question

D

dsealer

New member
I'm not sure where to place this post hopefully this is the correct forum.

So I've got some questions about microphones. I understand that one mic may sound different depending on who uses it. But my question is more a technical question, or at least that's my intention.

If I was recording a singer who is singing very forceably and loudly what type of mic “ might” capture this well? What I'm referring to might be, condenser/dynamic/tube/ribbon, cardio, spl, etc. Does any of this matter or is it just a matter of distance and singing technique?

I record vocals of this type more often than a quiet type of vocal.

Hopefully what I'm asking is clear.
Thanks,
Don…..
 
Loud rock vocals and metal screamers, I like a Shure SM7b, most of the time. It just works well with that style. Shure SM 57 also does a good job. Neumann U47/clone of U47, if I’ve got a Neve 1073/clone, or other preamp with lots of iron, that can be pushed a bit.
 
I'd probably start with a dynamic cardioid mic by default, but it's entirely possible a different mic would work as well or better. Perhaps my first mic would be an MD421. If that didn't work I'd try something different. If you've got a collection of mics and some experience with them you can usually navigate to the optimum one within three or four tries.
 
dsealer said:
..If I was recording a singer who is singing very forceably and loudly what type of mic “ might” capture this well? What I'm referring to might be, condenser/dynamic/tube/ribbon, cardio, spl, etc.
Click to expand...
To add most mics can handle' the loud part. Differences/exceptions run..
Many condensers -aside from the dedicated 'live variety, can be sensitive enough and designed to work with a bit more distance than a typical dynamic.
Ribbons are very delicate to 'blast/air movement. I.e. can be damaged just by blowing into them so, the 'cautions there.
Generally they all usually can handle the SPL given some appropriate cautions.
 
I suppose my question would be: are we talking rock forcefulness, or operatic/theatrical forcefulness? If the latter, a dynamic wouldn't be the way to go, but a condenser with some distance.
 
Another +1 on the SM7b. One of the greatest vocal mics ever designed at any price. For the loud types, sometimes the only mic ever needed.
 
If you do not have a well isolated and acoustically treated room, I would definitely go with a dynamic. And even if you do, my opinion and experience has also found the SM7b with a good preamp to be the go-to combination.

It just works for everything I have put to it. From Brittany Spears style weak girl voices to full on metal screamers, put that with a Neve or a Neve clone preamp and you have everything you need IMO

But then there is your budget to be of concern.

My vocal setup is the SM7b with a Vintech X73i. That is a $2000.00 + investment. Plus the room treatment.

Some get good results with just a SM58 and interface preamps. But it not going to have the same 'OMG that sounds awesome' ability.

I have had singers that have recorded in way better studios than mine use condenser mics in vocal isolation rooms that are blown away by how good the SM7b sounds when preamped correctly.

That is just my personal experience. There is no one perfect way, but I have not found better myself.
 
yes the sm7b is a good choice, it all depends on budget, I really like the RE20 as well within that price range, it's not necessarily better, it depends on your taste, do what's best for you, nobody can teach you that.
 
Btyre2013 said:
yes the sm7b is a good choice, it all depends on budget, I really like the RE20 as well within that price range, it's not necessarily better, it depends on your taste, do what's best for you, nobody can teach you that.
Click to expand...

And with that mic, you will also benefit from good acoustic room treatment and a good preamp. The RE20 is similar in sound from what I have heard from members I have worked with in more professional projects here. It still better with the above listed things. But it only $100 less expensive.

Sorry but if your budget is blown up by $100, then you may need to stop smoking, get some extra hours at your job, or do some pole dancing for a week.

The most important part is the room. Room Room Room. Treat that shit. Preamp is next, and likely your best purchase after the 'Room' treatment.

Sorry, did I mention acoustically treating your room?

I am not trying to be a dick here, but I cannot express how important it is to first get your room sounding good for any mic. Then experiment with microphones. You will eventually find that every mic will perform better with a high gain/clean preamp. It just how this shit works...

We all have budgets and that is absolutely a consideration. But if you want great quality then you may have to do something to make it happen.

Most people recording at home seem to be male. So I guess pole dancing is going to be tough to pull off... lol
 
"The most important part is the room. Room Room Room".

So I've heard this suggestion many times. With that in mind would you describe how a good room would be treated? Here's mine.
Keep in mind I did this 20 years ago and I was only trying to keep sound in. I didn't give any consideration to what it would do for my recordings.

I have 3 rooms in my basement studio. It's an old house, first deed registered in the 1850's. It had concrete walls and floors. I built walls inside the basement and made 3 rooms out of it. I built up the floor so the recording studio is not sitting on the original concrete floor.
I basically carpeted everything. The ceiling is a drop ceiling with fiberglass and cardboard ceiling tiles. I put carpet padding on the walls. It's thick wool fiber carpet padding, not the foam stuff. I put carpeting on the floors.

I have a control room (that is used mostly for storage today). The control room is about 8' x 5'. It has paneling for walls and a Plexiglas window (about 4' x 8').
I have a main recording room which is about 12' x 12'. All walls treated with carpet padding, floor is carpeted and ceiling is a drop panel.
I have a drum room which is about 6 ' x 12'. It is treated exactly like the main room. It also has a large Plexiglas window.
Doors on all rooms that close and isolate each room.

That's my recording environment. Would you describe the room you suggest?

Thanks,
Don.........
 
sparky123 said:
Shure sm58
Click to expand...
Or a SM57 if you just put a popscreen in front of it to limit the distance - not a bad thing even with the SM58. I've got the Shure A2WS on my SM57 permanently and use it as is for vocals sometimes. Still works for guitar amps, though it is, of course, not quite smack against the grill with that piece on.
 
alterman said:
This. Very surprising that no one confirms or even mentions this and most react only about mic choise.

Look at each profesional singer you like to choose. Look at it right away on youtube or TV or whatever.
And you will instantly see that at the moment they go louder they take distance from the mic, mostly by or with turning away from it a bit.

Distance and singing technique do matter! Always, a lot, no matter which mic. The mic choise is secondary.
Click to expand...

+1 And I am surprised too that no one has so far mentioned "Fold back"? The live singer might have an earpiece but even if not they will be getting an idea of their loudness from the venue's PA. In a dry studio no wonder they belt it out! Even worse if they are competing with a backing track.

Give them a set of buds or a single headphone (butcher a pair of Senny HD 202s. Decent sound for less than $20) . A bit of flattering 'verb might also help to control their dynamics.

BTW you can use the technique in reverse for a wimp. Feed in the backing and only a bit of "them". They will then have to work harder.

Dave.
 
Yeah, "singers" are not often "musicians" in the sense that they have not had the experience of handling dynamics in a group.

For centuries "good" musicians were able to produce an integrated sound together and where some instruments were naturally louder than others, we put them at the back. Look at the layout of the symphony orchestra.

The coming of electronic reinforcement changed all that. The worst example of it is the planet sized ego of the lead guitarist with a 100W+ 8 speaker stack. He ain't gonna turn down for ANY ***er! Bain of the lives of other "proper" musicians and sound men alike.

Dave.
 
freddie mercury was a musician who was also a singer, he wasn't a typical singer at all, I'm not one of those guitarists who likes crazy loud volumes, not all guitarists are egomaniacs, but admittedly a lot are.
 
Btyre2013 said:
freddie mercury was a musician who was also a singer, he wasn't a typical singer at all, I'm not one of those guitarists who likes crazy loud volumes, not all guitarists are egomaniacs, but admittedly a lot are.
Click to expand...

Indeed, watching Freddie work is a masterclass in mic technique.
I DID say "worst example" . I have a very talented guitarist musician son (reads, well up with theory, goes around with a book on harmony and counterpoint!) The reason I am not the father of a rich rock god son is because he has almost no ego.

Dave.
 
ecc83 said:
BTW you can use the technique in reverse for a wimp. Feed in the backing and only a bit of "them". They will then have to work harder.
Click to expand...
I do this in live setting where there are monitors all the time. Some people seem to be afraid of their own voice, but also I don't ever really know how loud the monitor is to the person on the stage. If I see somebody holding back or backing off the mic (distance = feedback in a live setting), I pull them down in the monitors and force them to compensate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top