Newbie microphone help

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrBrick
  • Start date Start date
M

MrBrick

New member
Hey guys. I have been looking into the differences between a condenser and a dynamic microphone and which would be better for youtube commentaries or voice overs. Does anyone know which type of microphone cuts out the most backround noise? My room echoes alot and sadly, I don't have much of a quiet space to record. However, I also don't want something right up in my face or really far away from me either. Which type of microphone is best suited for me?
 
Last edited:
Hey guys. I have been looking into the differences between a cardioid and a dynamic microphone and which would be better for youtube commentaries or voice overs. Does anyone know which type of microphone cuts out the most backround noise? My room echoes alot and sadly, I don't have much of a quiet space to record. However, I also don't want something right up in my face or really far away from me either. Which type of microphone is best suited for me?

"cardioid" and "dynamic" are totally different things - it's a bit like asking the difference between "petrol" and "bicycle" :D

"cardioid" is describing the pick-up pattern of the microphone.
"dynamic" is describing the type of microphone.

So - let's start at the beginning.......

MICROPHONE TYPES

Dynamic
These can be moving coil or ribbon

Condenser
These can be AF condenser, RF condenser or electret (pre-polarised) - and electrets could be either back-electret or front-electret (back-electret is much better).


PICK-UP PATTERNS

These are basically:-
omni-directional
hypo-cardioid (wide-cardioid)
cardioid
super-cardioid
hyper-cardioid
figure-8


There are also gun microphones which have an interference tube on the front of (normally) a super-cardioid capsule.

There are also boundary microphones which can be hemi-spherical or half-cardioid, half super-cardioid etc.

There are only two "pure" patterns - these are omni (pressure) and figure-8 (pressure gradient) and all other patterns are a combination of these.


The mic. which cuts out the most background noise is a Coles lip microphone (as used by boxing commentators and the like) and a head-worn mic. which holds the capsule close to the mouth (but NOT directly in front of the mouth).

For your use, I would suggest a super-cardioid condenser mic. just out of shot.

I hope this helps.
 
John is right of course but lets see if we can make this a bit less complicated (and apologies to electronics purists if I over-simplify TOO much!)

First, the two make microphone types, dynamic or condenser.

Dynamic mics work by attaching either a coil of wire or a magnet to a diaphragm. Your sound waves hit the diaphragm, wiggle the magnet inside the coil of wire or vice versa. This acts like a tiny generator and creates an electric current, effectively converting the sound waves to electrical energy. Because of the way this happens, the amount of electricity involved is tiny so dynamic mics are less sensitive than condensers--which can be an advantage in a noisy environment.

Condensers work like a capacitor in an electric circuit...in fact they ARE a capacitor. Don't worry if you don't know how these work but what you have is a diaphragm (again) this time wiggling in front of a charged plate--charged because some electricity is applied to it. Since you're not generating electricity, just controlling its flow, condensers are more sensitive (and many would say more accurate) but they DO pick up more background sound which, from what you say, is part of your problem.

Second, pick up patterns.

The design of the mic controls how much sound is picked up from various directions.

At one end of the spectrum is an "omni" (omnidirectional) mic that picks up sound equally from all directions. In a nice room these can sound really nice...but are awkward in a less than perfect room because they pick up everything.

The next step up is the cardioid you were asking about. This picks up most of its sound from one side (the front) and is fairly insensitive to the rear. If you plot out the sensitivity on a circular graph, it looks (in theory) a bit like a valentines day hear. Well, if you have a good imagination!

Moving up from there you have all the variants John mentioned--hyper cardioid, super cardioid and so on. These names designate how wide an area in front of the mic is in the sensitive "sweet spot" vs. how soon the less sensitive part starts. Things like super cardioid are commonly called shotgun mics and used for location recording in film, TV and so on.

Now, the thing is that both dynamic and condenser mics can have any of these patterns. For example, the Shure SM58 (that mic with a ball shaped head you see on lots of vocalists in rock bands) is a dynamic hypercardioid, used to cut out as much of the stage noise as possible. Similarly, those big mics you see in studios tend to be large diaphragm cardioid condensers...often a lovely sound but sensitive to room noises.

In treated studios, most voice overs are done on large cardioid condensers but at least some are done on large dynamic cardioid mics. In your situation, the ideal would be to do some room treatment. Otherwise, try a cardioid or hypercardiod dynamic...but, for best results, this'll have to be "in your face" in the way you don't want.

Finally, if you mean "on camera" when you say "voice over" then either a hyper or super cardioid (form of shotgun) would be one option...or maybe the sort of clip on mini lavalier mic you see on lots of TV announcers...but these are hard to find except in radio mic form.

Hope I haven't confused you too much!
 
"cardioid" and "dynamic" are totally different things - it's a bit like asking the difference between "petrol" and "bicycle" :D

"cardioid" is describing the pick-up pattern of the microphone.
"dynamic" is describing the type of microphone.

So - let's start at the beginning.......

MICROPHONE TYPES

Dynamic
These can be moving coil or ribbon

Condenser
These can be AF condenser, RF condenser or electret (pre-polarised) - and electrets could be either back-electret or front-electret (back-electret is much better).


PICK-UP PATTERNS

These are basically:-
omni-directional
hypo-cardioid (wide-cardioid)
cardioid
super-cardioid
hyper-cardioid
figure-8


There are also gun microphones which have an interference tube on the front of (normally) a super-cardioid capsule.

There are also boundary microphones which can be hemi-spherical or half-cardioid, half super-cardioid etc.

There are only two "pure" patterns - these are omni (pressure) and figure-8 (pressure gradient) and all other patterns are a combination of these.


The mic. which cuts out the most background noise is a Coles lip microphone (as used by boxing commentators and the like) and a head-worn mic. which holds the capsule close to the mouth (but NOT directly in front of the mouth).

For your use, I would suggest a super-cardioid condenser mic. just out of shot.

I hope this helps.

Lol. I'm such an idiot! I meant to type condeser and not cardioid! Sorry and thank you for helping!
 
What types of room treatment should I do so I can get the best sound quality from whatever microphone I choose? Also as I told John, I meant to put condenser and not cardioid. Sorry for any confusion!
 
What types of room treatment should I do so I can get the best sound quality from whatever microphone I choose? Also as I told John, I meant to put condenser and not cardioid. Sorry for any confusion!

Never mind Mr B! The term "condenser" for both the electrical component and thus the mic type was archaic and out of use when I went to "tech" 50yrs ago. They is CAPACITORS!

But I quess like rms bloody watts I am nevr going to win this one am I?
BTW, are you in UK perchance?

Dave.
 
Never mind Mr B! The term "condenser" for both the electrical component and thus the mic type was archaic and out of use when I went to "tech" 50yrs ago. They is CAPACITORS!

But I quess like rms bloody watts I am nevr going to win this one am I?
BTW, are you in UK perchance?

Dave.

No, I am in the US.
 
Plenty of products use out of date or different terminology. In the UK, at the time the pioneering work on microphones was being carried out by people like Blumlein and others the term 'Condenser' was firmly in use, and I for one, still call them condenser mics - the fact they contain capacitors and use a capacitor element as the key component don't change my historic preference for the original descriptions. Some People shun the modern terms for directional patterns and refer to the operating principal - as in 'pressure operated' or 'pressure gradient' rather than talk about omni and cardioids - which also removes the need to talk about the different types of cardioid.

Why the big deal? Use whatever term you wish - but we used 'phase' as a mixer label for years (knowing full well that it was not a phase switch at all) but now a few people get het up because we don't say 'polarity', which is technical the correct description.
 
Plenty of products use out of date or different terminology. In the UK, at the time the pioneering work on microphones was being carried out by people like Blumlein and others the term 'Condenser' was firmly in use, and I for one, still call them condenser mics - the fact they contain capacitors and use a capacitor element as the key component don't change my historic preference for the original descriptions. Some People shun the modern terms for directional patterns and refer to the operating principal - as in 'pressure operated' or 'pressure gradient' rather than talk about omni and cardioids - which also removes the need to talk about the different types of cardioid.

Why the big deal? Use whatever term you wish - but we used 'phase' as a mixer label for years (knowing full well that it was not a phase switch at all) but now a few people get het up because we don't say 'polarity', which is technical the correct description.

No, no big deal just trying to make the OP feel a bit better. Still, this game is jargon ridden enough that manufacturers should get their terms right at least.

Dave.
 
Never mind Mr B! The term "condenser" for both the electrical component and thus the mic type was archaic and out of use when I went to "tech" 50yrs ago. They is CAPACITORS!

But I quess like rms bloody watts I am nevr going to win this one am I?
BTW, are you in UK perchance?

Dave.

Them's fighting words! You just called me archaic!

My first brush with instruction on matters electronic was in my junior high days, 1965, 66 and 67. There were a couple of sections on electronics and we were taught the term "condenser" back then. They pretty quickly became capacitors but i don't have much trouble calling them condensers.

Hey! At least I didn't use Leyden jars!

Hmmmm...a Leyden jar microphone. Maybe that would appeal to purists.
 
Thanks for chipping in guys.
I think the term "condenser" comes from an era when scientists did not have a clue what electricity was and thought Leyden jars worked somehow like steam engines!
Remember, the poor sods flipped a doubloon for the direction of flow and got it wrong!

I know I am a pedantic old fart a lot of the time but "words" are all we have to explain a very complex process and the noob has trouble enough without confusing or sloppy (e.g. rms watts again!) terminology.

For sure, capacitor/condenser mic is perhaps being seriously picky and yes, the terms ARE used interchangeably in the "industry" but I have seen at least one post which asked what the difference was between them.

So, I shall soldier on until either brain is a med' induced fug or fingers no longer obey it, trying to keep terminology as clear and as accurate as I am able.

I would LOVE to see the back of dB "u" in favour of the vastly more logical dBV but I fear the "yoo" is far too deeply entrenched (and it suits specc' writers better anyway!)

Dave.
 
Yeah, dBV would make much more sense...but I fear that any conversion to that would be like the old joke about the UK changing to driving on the right to be compatible with Europe. However, to phase it in gradually, the plan was to swap trucks and lorries on one weekend and do cars and motocycles then next....
 
Most comments about microphones seem to revolve around how the air pressure gets converted into electricity, and most people agree that the mass of the element doing the conversion has much to do with the clarity/presence/response whatever we call it. I wonder why we are still using mechanics at all? We routinely slice up audio into samples, and we seem to do it pretty well nowadays. So is it possible to slice up sound - as in we use changes in the pressure wave to move something in a mic, so can we sample the pressure of air in the same way? If you pass something like a laser through a gas, does the gas allow more or less light to pass as it's density changes? If so, then with a pulsed light source at the sample rate desired, we have an A/D converter with no moving parts. This must have been done, because as a way of measuring just pressure with no moving parts, it's ideal for so many things, not just mics, but any form of gas pressure measurement. Will we eventually have dynamic, condenser, and laser mics?
 
Well Rob,

There was a "massless" transducer that went the other way!
The Ionofane was a plasma (aka flame!) HF speaker device that promised fabulous sound quality but seems to have been lost to the audio world?

But then there is often much misinformation given or implied about the mass of mic or speaker moving parts. Anything can be made to move fast or stopped if the forces that move and damp it are great enough. (the pistons in your Ferrari are heavier than any speaker cone but are nipping along pretty smartly when you red line it!). A heavy speaker cone won't be "slower" than a lighter one, just take more energy to start and stop it.

The ribbon microphone was held up as superior because of the light ribbon that was damped by the massive magnet. The paradox is that these day many people say ribbons sound best when running into a high impedance and 10k Ohms affords buggerall electromagnetic damping!

Dave.
 
Making your own sound absorbers is fairly easy, I made some frames with 1" X 3"s and put Roxul RHT80 2' x 4' panels in them. Then I covered them with burlap. As for mics I love the Mojave MA200 and the MA201fet, they're in that mid price range but I've never felt the need to upgrade to anything else.
 
The easiest way to think of it is the difference in how they pick up sound.

Condensers require phantom power, and are more easily broken. Dynamic are the opposite.
Condeners generally pick up more sound and have a warmer tone, but dynamic mics sound more natural.
 
The easiest way to think of it is the difference in how they pick up sound.

Condensers require phantom power, and are more easily broken. Dynamic are the opposite.
Condeners generally pick up more sound and have a warmer tone, but dynamic mics sound more natural.

WHERE!!! Do people GET this nonsense from?????


Dave.
 
If you use the ribbon microphones look into cinemaG and blumlien transformers. Follow the money.
 
Back
Top