Microphones...what am I missing??

  • Thread starter Thread starter rgraves
  • Start date Start date
R

rgraves

New member
OK, I know this sounds lame, but can you guys tell me what the difference is, really? haha

OK, here's the deal: I have a sm57, sm58, and MXL 990/991, MXL 2001 and an AKG 3000. The only reason I have that many mics is because I got all of them as a package brand new. Now I've done probabnly 40 or 50 different projects with them, but I started noticing that I couldn't hear any difference between any of them (including just using the shure 58 for vocals!)...so I did a test and recorded the same song with my friend's band on all 4 different mics (vocals only) in Cubase and then switched between them with the mute on and off function and honestly they all sound exactly the fricken same. And they sound great I might add, I couldn't notice any disadvantage to using one over the other, and I figured at least the sm58 would sound worse than the other non-condenser mics.

Anywho, I've studied recording at school for 2 years now(not very long) so I know there must be some difference since people go nuts over getting their hands on an expensive mic, but I'm just not hearing it. And comparing my recordings to those of artists that used very nice studios I'm not hearing the difference really.

By the way I'm using an EMU 1820m and recording mostly metal and pop type music.

Just need someone to whip me into shape and let me know their opinion of why I'm not hearing any difference (other than being deaf, thank you!) haha
 
Don't know what to tell you. Either your monitoring system isn't up to snuff or you just can't hear the differences. I can hear the differences.
 
Metal and pop?! What? Maybe thats the problem... They are sworn enemies
 
Does it sound different on other systems? That might be the clue about your monitoring not being right.

War
 
As Ty Ford says, if you can't hear a difference, it doesn't matter.
 
rgraves said:
By the way I'm using an EMU 1820m and recording mostly metal and pop type music.

Well there's the problem right there - those mics all have integral metal pop filters ;)

The good news is that you are in little danger of becoming a gear slut. The bad news is that after 2 years of studying recording, your ears haven't become very educated. That may be because the course isn't addressing that part of your development. There are some CD's available that are just for that purpose, to train your ears to pick up things like distortion, phase anomolies, eq problems, etc. If anyone knows where to find one of these, chime in.
Critical listening skills can be developed, which is certainly a must for audio engineering. Good luck,
RD.
 
sdelsolray said:
As Ty Ford says, if you can't hear a difference, it doesn't matter.
Yeah, but that might also mean you don't notice how rubbish it is! I dunno - every recording I've made (even the 'good' ones) sound crap to me. Most of the MP3s that get posted here do too. The problem is that I'm a piss-poor recordist so I can't do anything about it!!!! :)
 
Oh yeah, and studying music technology does not help your ears. Experience does. Get two very different mics together - 58 and C3000 - and record the same line of a vocal with each. Listen to the differences in the upper range frequencies.

The Listening Sessions are really good for practicing your ears with - even if they are somewhat flawed for actually choosing purchases from.
 
Thats quite worrying.. between those mics you should be able to hear a fair amount of difference.
 
Haha, well metal and pop was the simpliest way to describe it actually...hehe.

I actually record for myself (metal) and for my university classes (pop). But I also do classical recording, but that's a lot of MIDI stuff...

You guys might be onto a valid point (not necessarily though, hehe) and that is that my monitoring system is quite low cost. A couple of $299 monitoring speakers from Guitar Center, but at the same time, you would think there would be some kind of difference noticable. Perhaps I'm looking for the wrong thing, perhaps the biggest difference mics make is in the mix?? With several instruments? I have noticed when making complex songs consisting of strings, piano, acoustic and electric guitar, drums and vocals, then my mix doesn't sound pro. I had always accounted that to my inexperience with mixing and using compression and eq'ing. But perhaps that's where different or nicer mics make the most difference?
 
Robert D said:
Well there's the problem right there - those mics all have integral metal pop filters ;)

The good news is that you are in little danger of becoming a gear slut. The bad news is that after 2 years of studying recording, your ears haven't become very educated. That may be because the course isn't addressing that part of your development. There are some CD's available that are just for that purpose, to train your ears to pick up things like distortion, phase anomolies, eq problems, etc. If anyone knows where to find one of these, chime in.
Critical listening skills can be developed, which is certainly a must for audio engineering. Good luck,
RD.

Well, to be honest, the courses are very basic. First year is just "what is a mic". What's the difference between condenser and ribbon etc. It's incredibly slow and boring. Second year is more technical information as far as wave forms and phase cancellation, mic'ing techniques, stereo spread etc. but we don't even get to record anything at school until next semester, hehe. We've seen the console, but haven't even touched it, so practicing at home is essential. Perhaps you're right about just practicing on my own.

By the way, the only mic combination I didn't use was the SM57 because that's not even really a vocal mic. I guess I could try that to see the differences.
 
rgraves said:
...the only mic combination I didn't use was the SM57 because that's not even really a vocal mic.

Many many successful musicians would beg to differ with what you may have learned in school. For some voices, the 57 is a perfectly decent vocal mic, particularly for live use.
 
You should be hearing the differences... I know when I got a behringer B1 like 2 or 3 years ago I was blown away at the difference between it and an SM58. Every mic since has been noticably different since so I don't know man.
 
It's

Your preamps
Your Speakers
Your convertors

Or, your ears.

I would start with the preamps or speakers.
 
Middleman said:
It's

Your preamps
Your Speakers
Your convertors

Or, your ears.

I would start with the preamps or speakers.


Well I'll definately give it another try. My more recent question was do you guys think just a dry vocal line recording should bring out the differences or is it better to get the idea in a full mix.
 
if you play in a metal band, you better be wearing earplugs. if you can't hear the high end difference between a dynamic and a condenser, your hearing may be effed. seriously.
 
Warhead said:
I think Tom Petty uses a 57 a bunch.

War

Doesn't Petty use those Neumann stage condensors? I thought he endorsed them, but I could be wrong.
 
I don't know what he does use, but it would be funny if he used the Sting signature vocal mic.



???????????????????????????????????????????????????????//
 
rgraves said:
And comparing my recordings to those of artists that used very nice studios I'm not hearing the difference really.

well thts simple b/c home recording is becoming more abundant manufactures need to make budget gear
since were in the digital age of recording most stuios run on the same digital platforms as home studios bringing them closer in quality which is a bad thing. why do think all of these studios are shutting down? b/c of you and me.
all this happend b/c the industry set there standard to digital thinking they'll fix the market, really its bringing it down.
what can we do? i would answer this question but i dont want to get threatening messages from people on this bbs.
peace
 
Back
Top