SM94 v KSM109 v PG81 v MXL604 drum OHs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StuartV
  • Start date Start date
S

StuartV

New member
I need to mic up my drum kit. I've read what I could find on here. I already have a Shure drum mic kit, so I'm planning to put a Beta 52 on my kick, an SM57 on my snare, and an SM57 on my hi-hat.

I want to add 2 overhead mics to really capture the toms and other cymbals. I want to spend $350-ish or less (total). What I have seen (using MusiciansFriend prices) that look like options are the 4 I listed above. Shure PG81 ($130), Shure SM94 ($180), Shure KSM109 ($180), and MXL604 ($100).

From reading here, I gather the PG81s will not be nearly as good as any of the other 3 choices, so I only listed them here to say that they are right out. :-)

The SM94 and KSM109 are the same price. And the specs indicate that the KSM109 has a broader frequency response range. So, to the uniformed (like me), they would seem to be superior (for my application).

I really don't know anything about the MXL604. The sales guy at GC today suggested them as good for what I want to do. Of course, he also said the SM81 would be much better. But I don't want to spend $700 for 2 mics. Yet.

Within my price range, I want to get the best mics (for my application) that I can. I don't mind spending $360 to get better mics. But, if $200 will work just as well, I'd be happy with that, too.

So, can any of you offer any insight on my choices (or other alternatives)?

Thanks!

- Stu
 
A couple of choices could be a pair of SP B1's or a pair of MXL V67's should be able to get a pair of each in the $200 range. There are many other choices. Keep reading. You probably will find you don't need the 57 on the hats too.
 
The hi hat is the loudest single thing on a drum kit. You will find the overheads pick these up very well, and usually dont need to be mic'ed themselves.
 
Thanks, zbert. Are you saying that the SP B1s or the MXL V67s would work *better* than any of the choices I mentioned?

Like I said, up to my price point, I don't mind paying more to get better mics. Maybe I should say I would *rather* pay more, if it will get me better mics.

How does the B1 or V67 compare to the ones I listed?
 
Yeah, forget micing the hats. Use that 57 on a tom or something else. As for OHs, there are 100 choices out there. I personally like a LDC for an over head (I typically use AT4050s for OHs). But SDCs work fine too. Unless you are going to drop some major coin, pick something and go with it. Most general purpose condensor mics (aka, not too colored or hyped) that are more or less the same will work fine. And depending on what the room sounds like you are recording in (that is, assuming it sounds good) you might want to consider some spaced omnis for OHs too as you get much better bass response than with a cardioid. (Well, maybe more balanced bass response is a better way to say it)

Side bar, why is it that cardioids sound thinner from a distance than omnis? I would think once you get out of proximity effectville and dealing with a fully on axis source, they should respond similarly. Of course an omni will be flatter in general... but this always made me curious.
 
Last edited:
bubbagump said:
Side bar, why is it that cardioids sound thinner from a distance than omnis? I would think once you get out of proximity effectville and dealing with a fully on axis source, they should respond similarly. Of course an omni will be flatter in general... but this always made me curious.
Click to expand...

Because most cardioids have a natural bass rolloff in the farfield whereas omnis usually do not. Details in the big thread . . .
 
mshilarious said:
Because most cardioids have a natural bass rolloff in the farfield whereas omnis usually do not. Details in the big thread . . .
Click to expand...

Where abouts? I dug through for about 45 mins and didn't find it as I figured it had to be covered there... Off to dig some more.
 
bubbagump said:
Where abouts? I dug through for about 45 mins and didn't find it as I figured it had to be covered there... Off to dig some more.
Click to expand...

It's really right here, nice and early:

http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showpost.php?p=174426&postcount=43

If you follow that a pressure gradient mic is designed to create a phase shift, phase shift is a frequency-dependent effect. It's the same principle as EQ really, except this is acoustic rather than electrical. So if you tame the resonant peak with chambers that delay the signal arriving at the back of the diaphragm, the frequency effect of that delay is a function of the delay time. For a low frequency, the phase shift in degrees is smaller for a given delay than a higher frequency, so there is less cancellation, which means the low-frequency signal arriving at the back of the diaphragm is not attenuated much, and thus cancels the signal at the front.

This page explains it with some good pictures:

http://arts.ucsc.edu/ems/music/tech_background/TE-20/Proximity_Effect.html
 
Sheesh, passed over it a half dozen times I am sure as I didn't get out of it at all what you said above. Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top