presto5
New member
whats the difference between a large diaphram condenser mic and a small diaphram condenser mic....which is better for vocals? Thanks in advance
B
Big Kenny
New member
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
Ya yes my first read on HR.com. The very best here and it only took me a day to read and it's a life time of knowledge.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
I like to think of it this way- A small diaphragm mic is like the little glass peephole in a motel door. It sees big, because it is small. Because the diaphragm is small, it is therefore also light, which tends to make it sensitive. SD mics respond well to fast transients, when things go from quiet to loud, and back again, very fast (drums are a good example). Although large diaphragm mics are more commonly used for recording vocals, there are a number of SD mics that have been used for vocals with good results. I am a fan of AKG C2000B, an SD mic that works just fine on vocals. The Beatles used Neumann KM84's for vox on several occasions, which is a *very good* SD mic. The biggest problems with SD mics for vocals are 1.- their sensitivity tends to make them prone to "popping" on aspirated consonants, like "P", and- 2. their excellent off-axis response (seeing big because they are small) makes them subject to mic bleed, picking up other stuff along with the vocalist. If you have a good room with very little ambient noise, good control over your P's, and a good pop filter (or even 2, a couple inches apart), there's no reason why you can't record perfectly good vocals with an SD. It should also be said that LD mics can pick up ambient noise and pop perfectly well, also. There's no such thing as a free lunch.-Richie
mshilarious
Banned
Can't say I agree with SD mics having more off-axis response. What they have is more consistent off-axis response across the frequency spectrum as compared with LD mics. In that sense, LDs are much more likely to have off-axis slop.
SDCs are perfectly capable of very tight polar patterns; in fact I'd venture most of the super- or hypercardioid-only pattern condensers are SDs. Also, I think nearly all shotgun mikes are . . . that's a different principle though.
Also, sensitivity in terms of dBV/Pa is typically lower for SDs than LDs.
Good discussion here, although this is for omnis only:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Microphone-University/Technology-Guide/Large Diaphragm.aspx
SDCs are perfectly capable of very tight polar patterns; in fact I'd venture most of the super- or hypercardioid-only pattern condensers are SDs. Also, I think nearly all shotgun mikes are . . . that's a different principle though.
Also, sensitivity in terms of dBV/Pa is typically lower for SDs than LDs.
Good discussion here, although this is for omnis only:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Microphone-University/Technology-Guide/Large Diaphragm.aspx
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
What MS says regarding sensitivity, from an electronic point of view, is of course true. He has forgotten more about mic tech than I know. That doesn't change the real world fact that SD mics are prone to popping when used as vocal mics. My use of the term "sensitivity" was technically inaccurate. Thanks for the correction.-Richie
mshilarious
Banned
Another factor there is construction--the diaphragm is usually much closer to an end-address SDC than a side-address LDC, and it's likely to have less screening as well.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
No doubt true. For instance, the C2000B I mentioned above is a side adress small diaphragm mic, with a larger housing than a pencil mic, and it is not prone to popping particularly. I see your point that it is not the size of the diaphragm itself that makes most SD's pop promoters.
darrin_h2000
Banned
While LDC mics are very much the Goto for vocals...some very good vocal tracks have been cut with SDC mics...Josh Grobin has done some great stuff with SDC mics.
Similar threads
