Large or small ???????????????

[LocusLarsen]

I know I will probably end up getting one mic before I by a A/D, just to satisfy my want for a good quality mic. The thing is, I hear how people like (or HATE) the TLM103, or the 414, 4033, stuff like that....small diaframs

But what about Large Diaframs?

The small ones sit better with other instruments right?

Well, I am more interested in it sitting and sounding best by itself, with vocals. (.....and being able to get a good vocal track out of it.....) I think I mentioned a while ago that I have a very gutty vocal.

What is a good large diafram for like $800. Assuming that is even what I am looking for.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Frankly, 1 of those 3 ought to give you what you want! Want some vocal examples of the 103 through a DaviSound TB-3 with the same "Mic-All" preamps that your TB-10 will have in it? It'll give you an idea of what is possible with a 103 and "Mic-All" combo.

Listen to the vocals in this "Sweater" cover here (careful, the drum mix is bad; just a very quick mix):
http://home.attbi.com/~jwbros/Samples_Mp3s.html

On that guitar and vocal sample you heard, that was a 103 through my TB-3:
http://home.attbi.com/~pjandcompany/index.html

Sorry, currently don't have anything else up with that combo right now.

The 4033 is a great option too! I wouldn't hesitate to use that mic where I use my 103s! The C414B-ULS is my least favorite of the 3, but get it for $600 or under on eBay and send it to Jim Williams at Audio Upgrades for his mod and it kicks ass on most male vocals, total costing the same or less than the B-ULS or 103 through your local dealer!

 

[mgraffeo]

OK, sorry to do this, but it's a pet peeve. It's spelled "diaphragm", not "diafram". OK, now that I got that out of my system...

The TLM 103, AT 4033, and AKG 414 are not small diaphragm mics. They are all Large Diaphragm mics. And it's really at the discretion of your ears as to which is better. All the mics you listed are good Large Diaphragm mics in that price category. Others include the B.L.U.E. Dragonfly, the Studio Projects T3, the Rode NT-K, the Shure KSM-44. I'm sure that others can contribute their favorites, too.

If you're talking about small diaphragm mics, you're looking at Oktava MC-012's, Neumann KM184's, Rode NT-5's, AKG C451B's, MXL 603's, anything by Earthworks, etc. These are mics with a diaphragm of 1/2" or less. Again, up to personal taste and budget, but many people like the "natural-ness" of a Small Diaphragm condenser on acoustic instruments, especially when they're looking for a very natural sound.

-mg

 

[littledog]

I know I will probably end up getting one mic before I by a A/D, just to satisfy my want for a good quality mic. The thing is, I hear how people like (or HATE) the TLM103, or the 414, 4033, stuff like that....small diaframs

Could be a syntax issue, but it appears from your wording that you are classifying those mics as small diaphragms. Two of them are large diaphragm mics, and the 4033 is a medium diaphragm. None of them are small.

 

[LocusLarsen]

Sorry.........

But bout the way the guitar sits.........

Large make it sound the best by itself right? It captures the most detail?

Small keeps the frequency range from being all over the place?

What is my C3000B? I thought that was considered small diaphragm (it was late, I didn't feel like going back and looking it up, but I did know I was nowhere close to it).

 

[mgraffeo]

The C3000B is a large Diaphragm mic.

as for small vs. large on an acoustic, the small diaphragm tends to be more accurate with respect to frequency response. So if you're looking for a mic to pick up exactly what is there in the room, the small diaphragm is it.

The large diaphragm tends to "color" the sound more than the small, ie. there's a less-flat frequency response. You might have a few peaks in the high end, or a boost in the mids, etc, depending on the mic. Depending on the sound of the guitar, and the coloration of the mic, you can get some great results using large diaphragm condensers, since the condenser's uneven response could really complement the sound of the guitar. Sometimes, a large diaphragm will just suck on an acoustic, when the coloration of it detracts from the natural tone of the guitar.

My opinion is that a large diaphragm is sometimes more appropriate when you're trying to find a specific place in the mix for an acoustic, like when the tune has acoustics and electrics, or piano, or something else in the same frequency range. The small diaphragm is going to give you more of that "wow, that sounds just like an acoustic guitar is supposed to" feeling, on a singer/songwriter-type recording, where it's just an acoustic and a voice.

Hope this helps!

-mg

 

[Recording Engineer]

But remember, don't take the "small-diaphragm = accurate" and "large diaphragm = colored" statements as "word". In fact, I wish people didn't have to use that particular "general statement" so much because it REALLY throws-off new-comers to recording (case-in-point)! If you need a "general statement", I'd rather say "accurate" or "colored" depends on the actual mike and its placement. I would even rather say diaphragm mass and weight has more say in "accurate" or "colored" than large vs. small diaphragm, but even then, that doesn't sum it all up correctly either. What about the capsule, housing, grill, and SO MUCH MORE other things?

 

[Recording Engineer]

Yeah, I had thought of that too, but since we're talking mics "accurately" capturing or capturing with "color" (with the "color" being a result of the mic used or its position), a sound source(s) in a room, the sound of the room doesn't relate to the topic at hand.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

It's always a problem trying to describe sonic characteristics in words, and this is even more daunting when trying to pigeonhole products in relatively simple terms. Perhaps this will help:

Small diaphraghm front address mics dont have all the metal work and fancy cage stuff around them, so you basically hear the sound of the mic itself. If there are flaws (like peaks, dips, etc.), it's usually the result of the capsule basic design, and very little else.

Since the body is relatively small and the bulk of the body sits well behind the capsule, it doesn't cast much of an acoustic shadow to block signals coming in from off axis.

Large diaphragm side address mics usually have the capsule surrounded by a large cage, which creates it's own set of problems and advantages. IT creates a resonant cavity at some frequencies and blocks the signal at other frequencies. Sounds coming in from the side see more blockage due to the slanted mesh (from their viewpoint), and have more difficulty entering the mic at higher frequencies.

In general, small diaphragm front address mics do have smoother off axis response, compared to their larger brothers. But I think Weston is right that saying "larger mics having more coloration" can be very misleading.