Recording / Mics for low voices?

[Bobbsy]

For the most part, a mic with a flat frequency response sound boring and, well, flat. Use a measurement mic such at the sort you'd have for an RTA on real voice or music and it really sounds lacking most of the time.

However, that Schoeps mic I mentioned earlier for operatic use is as flat or flatter than most measurement mics yet it just seems to work for opera. Watch practically any opera video you can find and you almost always see that model (usually on extension tubes) in front of the vocalist(s).

My theory is that opera singers have such tight control over both their frequencies and their dynamics that any interference from the mic messes up their natural sound. I don't know if this is true or not but it makes sense to me!

However, what I AM sure of is that you can't choose a mic on numbers and graphs. You have to hear them with your voice.

 

[mixsit]

For the most part, a mic with a flat frequency response sound boring and, well, flat. Use a measurement mic such at the sort you'd have for an RTA on real voice or music and it really sounds lacking most of the time. ...

I hope it's understood the point wasn't to recommend 'flat as an end point- although it certainly can be

However, what I AM sure of is that you can't choose a mic on numbers and graphs. You have to hear them with your voice.

Rather one needs some baseline to work from.

 

[kummola]

just use any mic and then lots of eq

 

[grimtraveller]

just use any mic and then lots of eq

You've been jumping into threads, leaving daft one liners that say very little, explain even less and help not at all.
At the very least, explain yourself......if there is any rhyme or reason to the bombs you drop.

 

[JimmyS1969]

I am guessing it is Barry again...

 

[Radiophonic]

I have a fairly low baritone voice and my phonations are balanced in real life, but when I record I get problems. Instead of my natural sound, when I sing in my lower range, my middles or rough tones get amplified and condensed a huge amount, causing a clipping like effect without actually clipping; where as all the other sound articulation gets diminished.

My microphones are very cheap and my mixer is very very old, which all seem to be the problem here. I can sing perfectly, but I still naturally have rougher sounds in my lower range.

The key point you mention here is: cheap microphones.

The microphone is the key ingredient in any acoustic recording system; it's down to that old adage: garbage in == garbage out. In short - any loss of detail or distortion introduced at the start of the recording chain cannot be replaced later. I would recommend a large-diaphragm condenser - something like the sE2200a (or sE2000 if funds are tight), make sure it's in a suspension mount to avoid low-frequency rubbish being fed back to it up the stand, and put a mesh pop shield in front of it.

Failing this, or if your mixer cannot provide the "phantom" power required by a condenser, try a studio-quality dynamic mic with a really flat frequency response (something like the Beyer m69).

Either of these routes will ensure that the signal reaching the mixer is reasonably close to the sound leaving your mouth. I'd also advocate minimal or zero use of tonal equalisation during recording. Leave any use of EQ to the post-production and mastering stages. Aim for as "plain and honest" a capture of the original sound as you can first. I reiterate: the better the original source signal and recording, the more you can do with it later. Anything you capture can be enhanced; anything lost is lost forever.