P
patrich
New member
Hi all, please help me. I'm looking forward to getting some advice on buying a good microphone (female voice) . I'm gonna start a recording studio in my home.
John Willett
Circle Sound Services
What's your budget?
A good vocal mic. is normally in the region of £800 to several thousand.
You can get cheaper, but after a while you will want to replace with better.
If you buy wisely at the start a good mic. will last you forever (I still have mics that I bought in 1985 that are still being made today, now just cost a lot more).
The things to invest as much as you can afford (and more) are microphones and monitors, as these will last decades.
The things to be careful with is anything with a microprocessor, as these will be out-of-date in about 3 or 4 years and you will then be able to buy something better forhalf the cost.
But microphones, especially, buy well and you will be able to bequeath them to your grandkids.
A good vocal mic. is normally in the region of £800 to several thousand.
You can get cheaper, but after a while you will want to replace with better.
If you buy wisely at the start a good mic. will last you forever (I still have mics that I bought in 1985 that are still being made today, now just cost a lot more).
The things to invest as much as you can afford (and more) are microphones and monitors, as these will last decades.
The things to be careful with is anything with a microprocessor, as these will be out-of-date in about 3 or 4 years and you will then be able to buy something better forhalf the cost.
But microphones, especially, buy well and you will be able to bequeath them to your grandkids.
E
ecc83
Well-known member
John, I got taken to task slightly a few days ago for suggesting that you need to be in the $5000 a pair region for "professional" monitors. If there is any fairness in the world I think your statement that "good" microphones are in the $800+ bracket should be criticised in the same fashion? But I shall leave that...
OP has only said "female voice" and "starting recording". Nowt about an AI or the space they are doing this in. Then, Genre? Operatic, general "pop", rap? The mic choice will surely depend upon whether the style will be close miccing or belting from a foot or so?
"Transducers" again you see, slippery things.
Dave.
OP has only said "female voice" and "starting recording". Nowt about an AI or the space they are doing this in. Then, Genre? Operatic, general "pop", rap? The mic choice will surely depend upon whether the style will be close miccing or belting from a foot or so?
"Transducers" again you see, slippery things.
Dave.
Pinky
and The Brain...
I'm with Dave, although "good" is highly subjective, I doubt "good" for most people (especially on a homerecording forum) means they have to spend $800+ on a mic.
Rode makes some decent entry level mics. I've [finally] used my NT1000 a few times recently and it's a very solid, all purpose vocal mic. I doubt you would need more than that for a "starting" mic. Your audio interface's input will ultimately determine what type of mic you can get, or whether you may need a better interface, dedicated mic preamp, or mixer with phantom power.
And yes Dave, $5000 is A LOT to spend on monitors nowadays (*especially* for homerecording, ie - budget home setups). There's some very, very good sounding stuff in the sub $1000 market right now. Technology and quasi-slave-labor, aint it grand!
It sounds like you two have graduated to Gearslutz.com, avsforum, or one of those more boutique, producer level forums.
E
ecc83
Well-known member
No Pinks! I am NOT suggesting that HR peeps need to spend anything like $5k on monitors.
What I AM saying is that the very low colouration, precise imaging, SPL capability and sample to sample consistency ONLY really starts at these elevated cost levels.
Just a couple of examples. Take a good, 300 quidish 15W valve guitar amp running a V30? That amp will produce sound levels way above anything $1000 monitors can approach and indeed many "studio" monitors would be hard pressed to reproduce it. Second example..What sort of money would monitors cost you to reproduce the full welly of an Ampeg SVT rig?!
Of course, SPL Capability is far from the greatest parameter involved but I think you get my drift?
I think John's reasoning is..."I" have a mic that "I" find fabulous for vocals. Today that mic will cost you $800+. Ergo, good vocal mics must cost $800+ ?
Dave.
What I AM saying is that the very low colouration, precise imaging, SPL capability and sample to sample consistency ONLY really starts at these elevated cost levels.
Just a couple of examples. Take a good, 300 quidish 15W valve guitar amp running a V30? That amp will produce sound levels way above anything $1000 monitors can approach and indeed many "studio" monitors would be hard pressed to reproduce it. Second example..What sort of money would monitors cost you to reproduce the full welly of an Ampeg SVT rig?!
Of course, SPL Capability is far from the greatest parameter involved but I think you get my drift?
I think John's reasoning is..."I" have a mic that "I" find fabulous for vocals. Today that mic will cost you $800+. Ergo, good vocal mics must cost $800+ ?
Dave.
witzendoz
Senior Member
The often repeated question, with no info about budget.
Instead of asking an age old question read other peoples posts and responses first, the amount of information on this forum is huge.
Alan.
joey2000
New member
I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. You can get a very good vocal mic for $200, even less.
Also I suggest going here and reading the posts (and asking your question): https://homerecording.com/bbs/equipment-forums/microphones/
M
mixsit
Well-known member
Never came back..? -with some idea of a budget.
But in case you do.. When one says 'recording some vocal (or other acoustic things) at home'..
Figure on some of it going to some acoustic baffles to put around you and the mic. Doesn't have to cost much at all. But I'd much rather go with about any decent low budget mic and some acoustic gobos, than a bunch more money on the mic picking up poor room tone effects you'd likely be constantly fighting.
But in case you do.. When one says 'recording some vocal (or other acoustic things) at home'..
Figure on some of it going to some acoustic baffles to put around you and the mic. Doesn't have to cost much at all. But I'd much rather go with about any decent low budget mic and some acoustic gobos, than a bunch more money on the mic picking up poor room tone effects you'd likely be constantly fighting.
arcaxis
Well-known member
There was an initial suggestion of what he/she should be looking to spend and I think they got scared away
rob aylestone
Moderator
Not surprised, to be honest! My experience is that you only appreciate what an expensive piece of kit does for you, when you outgrow the more modest one you started with - BUT - I have plenty of pieces of kit that are at the budget end that I have not outgrown, and I also have lots of expensive equipment that sits unused in my studio and live rigs.
The notion that a beginner is told they need to spend lots before they even record anything and discover their voice is poor, or their musical talent lacking - or the entire process is simply too much for them is simply wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we've all come across people who bought a U87 and produce truly dire recordings with it, and then there are others with an SM58 producing lovely sounding stuff.
Newcomers could be very happy with a zoom and a 58, with their iPod headphones. Until, their ears develop and they can hear the shortcomings.
When you have a large amount of mics available - you select the most appropriate one. One mic is zero choice - so how do you pick the right one for your own voice without trying lots?
The notion that a beginner is told they need to spend lots before they even record anything and discover their voice is poor, or their musical talent lacking - or the entire process is simply too much for them is simply wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we've all come across people who bought a U87 and produce truly dire recordings with it, and then there are others with an SM58 producing lovely sounding stuff.
Newcomers could be very happy with a zoom and a 58, with their iPod headphones. Until, their ears develop and they can hear the shortcomings.
When you have a large amount of mics available - you select the most appropriate one. One mic is zero choice - so how do you pick the right one for your own voice without trying lots?
Last edited:
John Willett
Circle Sound Services
Not at all - $800 is far too cheap a mic. for me to use for recording vocals - $1,200 is about the cheapest I would use and ideally a lot more (most of my own mics ae $1,500 plus).
I was just saying that $800 is about the starting price for a good mic. (equating to about £500 UK).
Below this you can get reasonable mics that may very well be acceptable.
But, invest wisely on a mic., and it will last you forwver - a cheap mic. you will replace and replace again - so money spent on a better mic. now will not have to be spent again.
Oh - and I agree with you about monitors - mine are about $10k a pair and the small ones about $3k.
But, just because I strive for the best, doesn't mean I do not understand the budget end and I always try to advise where best to spend a limited budget and know what can be good value at the low end (Line Audio mics for example - though they don't do an LDC vocal mic.).
witzendoz
Senior Member
However John, there is another side to this. If the poster can only afford a $200 mic that they may have saved for over a number of months because they do not earn large sums of money, do they buy a reasonable $200 mic and start creating music, or wait for months or years saving until they can afford the $800 for the once in a lifetime mic?
Not everyone here will have $800 to buy a mic and not everyone here lives where they can earn reasonable wages.
My advice buy a resonable mic with what you can afford, look at secondhand. Create your music with what you have while saving for better gear and then buy better gear as you can afford it. You can always sell on the cheaper gear later, which is why I suggested buying secondhand gear in the first place.
Alan.
joey2000
New member
Excellent point, and this can be very frustrating......good luck finding a store that has any kind of set up (never mind a good one) where you can do just that.
Only for those who have more money than sense. Good - very good - mics can be had for as little as $100-200. And FYI for most people getting into recording, even that is not exactly chump change.
Your posts clearly indicate otherwise. PS: price and quality are not always in direct proportion.
E
ecc83
Well-known member
A couple of years ago Sound on Sound magazine did what has now become something of a legendary test of several microphone pre amps. They insist it should not be called a "shootout" but everyone else does and it has changed the "boutique, high end pre amp" discussion in a rather subtle but IMHO very welcome way. In effect people cannot tell if a pre amp costs $100 or $2000 with any degree of reliability.
It would be interesting to repeat the test with a decent price cross section of microphones?
I shall put the thought into their heads.
Dave.
It would be interesting to repeat the test with a decent price cross section of microphones?
I shall put the thought into their heads.
Dave.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
You're way off base.
John is 100% right.
Not saying you can't cut a decent vocal track with a $100 SM57...but if you are talking studio recording standards...*good* vocal mics start in the $1k+ range. These are usually specialized mics that have a certain sound or personality...and tend to work very well on even the more demanding and/or delicate sources.
The problem is that most folks here approach these things from a very narrow and somewhat personal perspective...called "home recording"...or at least to them home recording is often treated like an "I'm not too serious about recording" mentality.
I really do hate when people here bring up that fact, that it's only "home recording" as though that somehow changes the laws of physics and acoustics, and you can immediately budget everything down to a couple of hundred dollars and have as good as can be had.
Hey...I get it...if your budget only allows you to buy cheap...then your perspective will center around that, and your perspective of "good" is a lot different than someone else's who can experience higher-end gear.
Also...I get it that some folks who record at home are ONLY looking for a cheap/low-budget solutions, and to them, audio quality is somewhat secondary...and that's fine...
...but I think there are a lot of folks who may record at home, but still *strive for a higher quality solution*...so no reason to make every home recording perspective a dumbed-down version of pro studio solutions.
I'm just saying that you can do a lot inexpensively...but you also know where the money went when you use a high-end piece of gear, at home or in a pro studio....but of course, your signal chain needs to support that higher-end piece of gear.
Sticking a $5000 mic into a $50 interface is kinda pointless.
Pinky
and The Brain...
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
No, there's nothing "cyclical" in my thinking, if you read the whole post.
Just reality based on actual use and experience with a wide variety of gear.
Someone was implying that anything more than a $200 mic makes no sense.
The only people who really believe that are people who have never used any mic costing more than $200.
I'm saying that inexpensive gear can have its uses...but this notion, that seems to exist mostly on home rec forums, that anything costing more than a few hundred bucks is some kind of audio scam and has no impact on audio quality...
...is pretty amusing.
The problem is that on home rec forums...many people base their *absolute* opinion of audio gear quality and it's use, by what they can afford...and everything outside of their budget is off the table, to the point where the denial turns into dismissal.
It's one thing to say "I can only afford a $200 mic and I'll do the best I can with it until I can get something better"...instead of saying "Anything costing more than $200 is a waste of money and makes no sense".
I'm not sure what point you're making or which view you're taking...you just seem to be sniping.
Just reality based on actual use and experience with a wide variety of gear.
Someone was implying that anything more than a $200 mic makes no sense.
The only people who really believe that are people who have never used any mic costing more than $200.
I'm saying that inexpensive gear can have its uses...but this notion, that seems to exist mostly on home rec forums, that anything costing more than a few hundred bucks is some kind of audio scam and has no impact on audio quality...
...is pretty amusing.
The problem is that on home rec forums...many people base their *absolute* opinion of audio gear quality and it's use, by what they can afford...and everything outside of their budget is off the table, to the point where the denial turns into dismissal.
It's one thing to say "I can only afford a $200 mic and I'll do the best I can with it until I can get something better"...instead of saying "Anything costing more than $200 is a waste of money and makes no sense".
I'm not sure what point you're making or which view you're taking...you just seem to be sniping.
E
ecc83
Well-known member
Maybe not into a $50 interface but you could plug a $5000 mic* into a $150ish AI and get results that would stand scrutiny by the best in the business and on very high end monitors/rooms.
This is because even a modest digital system (Steiny' UR22 say) is way better for distortion and noise than tape ever was. Indeed, microphones have had to IMPROVE in terms of self noise so as not to be the weakest link in a recording chain.
The old guard in recording of John's standing such as Angus MacKenzie could not WAIT to be rid of the quality shackles of analogue and were very early adopters of digital converters (running into video machines). This of course was almost all "classical" live acoustic recording.
Then the fact this IS a forum for Home Recording. The views of the professionals are of course welcome, indeed vital but any claim that the noob must spend 20 times the average amount for ANY part of the recording chain without evidence is snobbish, unhelpful and just plain wrong.
So, does that make my stance on $5k monitors illogical? No, I don't think so. An active monitor is a very different machine from a capacitor microphone. The energies and displacements are many orders apart. Microphones are used on "sounds as you find them" you can't "turn them up" . Monitors, main studio jobbies, have to be able to produce very high sound levels for protracted periods. Microphone electronics whist being extremely clever in many cases in getting superb performance using very low power, are not THAT expensive to make. 500W power amps with impeccably performance tend to run a bob or two more!
So, you can make an LDC and sell it for $250 that will deliver excellent results. You CAN make a "nice" monitor for about the same (each!) but it will not go very loud or very low.
Lastly I am sure our very own Aunty Beeb are not spending £1000 on every mic and their stuff is pretty good!
Dave.
This is because even a modest digital system (Steiny' UR22 say) is way better for distortion and noise than tape ever was. Indeed, microphones have had to IMPROVE in terms of self noise so as not to be the weakest link in a recording chain.
The old guard in recording of John's standing such as Angus MacKenzie could not WAIT to be rid of the quality shackles of analogue and were very early adopters of digital converters (running into video machines). This of course was almost all "classical" live acoustic recording.
Then the fact this IS a forum for Home Recording. The views of the professionals are of course welcome, indeed vital but any claim that the noob must spend 20 times the average amount for ANY part of the recording chain without evidence is snobbish, unhelpful and just plain wrong.
So, does that make my stance on $5k monitors illogical? No, I don't think so. An active monitor is a very different machine from a capacitor microphone. The energies and displacements are many orders apart. Microphones are used on "sounds as you find them" you can't "turn them up" . Monitors, main studio jobbies, have to be able to produce very high sound levels for protracted periods. Microphone electronics whist being extremely clever in many cases in getting superb performance using very low power, are not THAT expensive to make. 500W power amps with impeccably performance tend to run a bob or two more!
So, you can make an LDC and sell it for $250 that will deliver excellent results. You CAN make a "nice" monitor for about the same (each!) but it will not go very loud or very low.
Lastly I am sure our very own Aunty Beeb are not spending £1000 on every mic and their stuff is pretty good!
Dave.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I don't see where anyone, myself included, is claiming that a "noob must spend 20 times the average amount for ANY part of the recording chain".
The question/discussion was what makes for good vocal mics and also, what that costs.
Sure..."good" is relative...that's what we're all saying...but you can't dismiss everything over $200 just 'cuz this is a "home rec" forum.
It's got nothing to do with "snobbishness"...it's about looking at the whole picture from low budget to high-end...that way people can make their own decisions where they want to take it.
The bad thing is when noobs believe, or are told by others, that more expensive gear makes no sense and provides no quality improvement.
There are many low-budget noobs on home rec forums...and that's cool....we've all been there when first starting out...
...the other reality is that "home recording" is not just some guy with a porta-studio and one mic...not anymore.
There are many people who have some fairly involved rigs and who don't pursue only low budget solutions...yet they're still just doing "home recording". You imply that there's a hard line...low-budget home recording...and then million dollar pro commercial studios.
You get it about higher-end gear quality...but then you go off on this tangent saying that it's snobbishness to even mention it on home rec forums...yet you're the one who brought up the $5000 monitors.
I only spent $1200 on my Mackies 824 monitors (but I have been looking to upgrade
)...because I was told they were about the least expensive solution that would hold up in a pro audio environment, and for awhile, they were seen in lots of studios...until a new flavor-of-the-month came out.There should never be a point where you simply "settle in" and that's it...IMHO...but YMMV...
E
ecc83
Well-known member
I don't see where anyone, myself included, is claiming that a "noob must spend 20 times the average amount for ANY part of the recording chain".
The question/discussion was what makes for good vocal mics and also, what that costs.
Sure..."good" is relative...that's what we're all saying...but you can't dismiss everything over $200 just 'cuz this is a "home rec" forum.
It's got nothing to do with "snobbishness"...it's about looking at the whole picture from low budget to high
IMHO is "snobbish" (sorry, can't think of a better adjective!) to state (without evidence) that a microphone can only be "reasonable" at $800 and does not enter the realms of "good" until $1200.
I have explained at some length, (twice!) why really excellent monitors are going to be expensive but I will give it another do!
A microphone is a "one shot wonder" within reasonable parameters you can use most mics on most sources. This is simply not true of monitors. Big control rooms, especially those with heavy treatment demand exceptional power handling and acoustic output.
It is also as well to remember that most of the results of these multi k$ mics will be heard on cheap cans or buds via MP3 or on the "worse than FM" DAB! Not an excuse not to use them of course, just an observation.
Dave.