Sennheiser E609 for guitar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter januszian
  • Start date Start date
J

januszian

New member
Hello. I was thinking about buying a Sennheiser E609 for my MesaBoogie 4x12 Oversized cabinet. I read a thread here that a Shure SM57 just doesn't work with Mesa cabs. Any thoughts?

Also my ideal recording sounds exactly like the tone I'm hearing from the amp and cab themselves so is the E609 going to color the sound much?

Should I go for a condenser straight away? And which condensers can handle the demonic volumes that I use? :)
(you really can't be in the room without good earplugs. Or even near the cab with earplugs for that matter...)

Thanks!
(btw. VERY NICE FORUM! Good info on things that I want to know about!)
 
januszian said:
I read a thread here that a Shure SM57 just doesn't work with Mesa cabs. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think just about anything tends to work with Mesa cabs. You could pick one at random and it would work. At least that's my experience. SM-57's are fine . . . I have no experience w/ the 609 Silvers but everyone on the board seems to think they're the sh*t.
 
januszian said:
Also my ideal recording sounds exactly like the tone I'm hearing from the amp and cab themselves so is the E609 going to color the sound much?
Click to expand...

If that's what you're after, then be prepared to hear something very strange. In order to get that sound you are after on the recording, your amp may have to sound completely different. Instead of finding the sound you want on the amp and then trying to capture that sound, try actually listening to the amp "through the mic" via headphones. This will give you a good representation of what will actually go down in the recording. Then you can tweak the amp settings until you get the sound you're after through the mic.
 
I use the E609's alot on big stacks and I think it is alot better than a sm57, the reason is in the capsule size. The sm57 has a very small capsule while the E609 is your standard 1" capsule. This extra size makes for more dynamics included in the recording. Since you have more than 2 speakers in your cabinet I would get 2 or more E609's. I use 2 E609's close mic'ed panned center and then I usually use a tube mic about 3-5ft. away from the cabinet panned at 9 or 3'o clock. This mehtod will give you the true amp sound you might be looking for.
 
Of course, you are talking about the e609s, right? From what I understand, the new silver version (which I have and love) sounds different than the original.
 
Yes I'm talking about the never model.

I was just wondering, since my gear is kinda on the budget side, is there any point in getting expensive condenser mics for the Soundcraft Spirit E8 mixer?

Btw. do you guys know anything about the M-Audio Solaris? Is it any good?
 
januszian said:
Btw. do you guys know anything about the M-Audio Solaris? Is it any good?
Click to expand...

I have a pair of them and they are awesome! Massive Master also has a pair and seems to think quite highly of them as well. I haven't ever used one close up on an amp, but I have used one in omni mode as a room mic with an SM57 close up on the amp, and the depth and accuracy afforded was excellent.

They've been great for acoustic guitar, most vocals, drum overheads...just about anything i've tried them on so far.
 
night'schild said:
The sm57 has a very small capsule while the E609 is your standard 1" capsule. This extra size makes for more dynamics included in the recording.
Click to expand...

Tha'ts . . . um . . . interesting and rather fascination logic.

:D
 
Do you not agree with my logic Chessrock?

What does evrybody else have to say about my statement:
"The sm57 has a very small capsule while the E609 is your standard 1" capsule. This extra size makes for more dynamics included in the recording."
 
night'schild - just need a few corrections on facts there. first of all its the diaphragm size that you should be referring to. Also, i think the SM57s diaphragm is a 1". But if its not, its totally irrelevant to your statement because diaphragm size has nothing to do with dynamic pickup. Not does it have anything to do with how low or high the frequencies are that it picks up. It could mean that the bigger diaphragm is more colored than a smaller but thats not always true either.

So basically the statement was illogical. But thats ok, i wouldnt be surprised if someone has to come in and correct my facts because I am hear learning and say stuff that isnt 100% correct.

Danny
 
darnold_ 1st the capsule and diaphragm are the same thing. 2nd the sm57 has a smaller DIAPHRAGM which means dynamically speaking it wont sound the same as a e609 in that more sound space is picked up by the e609. If you know anything about how a diaphragm works you would know that larger area = improved pick-up of subtleties. That was all I was trying to imply.
 
Night'schild, you are incorrect.
You should read the big mic thread at the top of the mic forum for a real understanding of how microphones work.
 
Last edited:
night'schild said:
...If you know anything about how a diaphragm works you would know that larger area = improved pick-up of subtleties. That was all I was trying to imply.
Click to expand...
Sorry. If that were so, we'd all be using 18 inch woofers as microphones. :)
 
night'schild said:
If you know anything about how a diaphragm works you would know that larger area = improved pick-up of subtleties. That was all I was trying to imply.
Click to expand...


If you knew anything about how a diaphragm works, you'd know that the larger the area, the more energy it will take to move it, which actually means somewhat slower / less pickup of subtleties. Of course, this is assuming we're comparing two diaphragms of the same thickness, etc.

This is just a bit of advice; If you're going to pretend like you actually know something about a subject . . . . you should at least get to know a little bit about it first. :D At least enough so you can fake your way through it like I do. :D

Otherwise, you run the risk of sounding like a windbag. Kinda' like me -- except I actually know a little bit. So right now, you just sound like a dumber version of myself -- which isn't all that bad, I guess. Things could certainly be worse. I like the way you dig in to this stuff, though. You want to teach others, and that's a good quality.
 
well see then i learned something new myself because. I was actually debating in my mind whether the capsule and diaphragm were the same thing. But recollecting on my memory back to what i remember reading i thought the capsule was more than just the diaphragm.

Is the SM57 smaller than a 1" diaphragm? The tech sheets dont really tell the size of the diaphragm but i know the screen around an SM57 is a little wider in diameter than an inch so i assumed the diaphragm should be pretty close by. Oh well. It really is irrelevent anyway.

Sorry we hijacked this thread a little bit but when theres false information like that stated it still is for the best to be corrected and confirmed.

I have heard the e609 mainly with live gigs. Basically all i can say is just what i hear from that because i have not used the mics myself. But its pretty obvious in that application that they have that basic Sennheiser sound. Which is much tighter low mids and bass with a little more crunch (good crunch) on the highs. Comparing the Sennheiser sound to the SM57 ive felt the SM57 to be pretty loose and tubby on the low mids, horrible bass response and the highs are smooth but also a little loose but can work really well with some gtr amps.

Basically, like with any mic. Sometimes i hate the SM57 on the gtr amp im using so ill use a MD421 or the Royer 122 and they work. But sometimes ill throw an SM57 on the amp and its exactly what im looking for, whether its oldies rock, punk, hardcore whatever. It suprises me at how well it works when it does work.

So having one of these in combination with an SM57 is a pretty good idea.

I assume it will definately be a better choice on bass amp, kick drum, toms etc than a 57 because of the better bass response and the tighter low mids.

Danny
 
januszian,
Sile and Darnold said it all, pretty much. The e609 silver is a useful versatile mic.
Darnold's compare/contrast with the 57 was spot-on. It does depend on the source, but in general I'd agree with what he said as far as characteristics. Neither is better or worse, just different. I gotta admit to really liking the 609s for heavy guitar music, because of the tighter lows and low mids.

I've got a couple and like them a lot. I mostly use them live. (This whole recording thing is kind of new to me, but I've done live sound as my job for a long time.) One of my favorite easy fast guitar sounds is a 57 and a 609s together. They sound different enough to complement each other well, and together they can make a huge-ass guitar sound. Metal/hardcore and chug-chug bands usually really like the sound I get for them.
I like them live 1) for the sound and 2) you don't need a stand- just hang it over the top.

That being said, see if you can try one out first against a 57. Either or both will be a good purchase.

Darnold, I liked your post, what you said about making sure people get the right info, and about different mics being right for different things at different times. Since I've been reading things on this forum I've been a lot more aware of mic choice and how much of a difference it makes. I used to not think it was as important for live work, and thought more expensive was always better. It's probably the most important thing I've picked up here. I just did a bluegrass gig and brought all my nice mics, and ended up using mostly 57s. They sounded best through the PA. Go figure.

BTW a 57 diaphragm is somewhere around 3/4". I had to send one back to Shure this summer cause I got to see the diaphragm closer than I wanted. :eek:

Madaudio, just for geeky knowledge, the 609 and 609s are both remakes of the 409. The 609 (now discontinued) was supposed to be a big deal, as people really liked the 409 for guitar and other things. It was over-priced ($349), brittle-sounding screechy highs with muddy lows and thin low-mids. "Improved" they called it. The 609s is supposed to be like the 409. The old 409.(They made a shitty version before they discontinued it.)

januszian, thanks for letting us hijack your thread, and have fun. :)
 
Thanks very much for the helpfull info!

And it was a joke, it really was actually very interesting what you said about the diaphragm size. :)

I'm getting the Senn and I also can use a 57 or a 58 too so maybe I'll combo them or something.

btw. how about the phase thingy? How do I make sure the mics are in phase? out of phase? The Soundcraft doesn't have a phase button but you can flip the phase in Sonar 3 which is my recording software.

thanks.
 
januszian said:
how about the phase thingy?
Click to expand...
It's all about placement. Just make sure to follow the 3-to-1 mic rule*, which basically means than when using more than 1 mic on a source, you want the distance bewteen the mics to be at least 3 times the distance between mic and source. So for example if you've got the 57 2" away from the cab, you want the 609 to be at least 6" away from the 57.


*I believe this rule only applies to cardiod mics, which both the 57 and 609 are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top