Stripping Down Mic Collection

Y

Yareek

New member
Been thinking about stripping down my mic collection. I've moved from a huge PC rig with lots of inputs and pres to a laptop with 4 inputs. I used to do a lot of recording of my bands' rehearsals, but now I'm not in one and I feel like having a dozen mics is too much.

Here's what I've got now:

(1) Rode NT2
(2) Studio Projects C4's
(1) AKG D112
(1) Shure SM57
(3) Sennheiser e604
(1) Beyer M201
(1) Audio Technica AT Pro 25

Here's what I was thinking I'd like to have:

(2) Rode NT2
(1) Shure SM81
(1) Shure SM57
(1) Sennheiser MD421

I noticed my C4's on overheads and acoustic guitar are too "pretty" and laid back sounding...I'd like something more aggressive. But I also used my NT2 as an overhead and REALLY liked the sound. I feel I could get a great drum sound with a pair of those alone. The Beyer is a great snare mic but I find I have to boost the high and low end so much that either an SM57 or a SDC with the overheads would probably do a better job. And the D112, I still have to EQ the hell out of it to get even a decent kick sound (which sounds FANTASTIC in the room) so I figure get a flatter mic that has more utility.

Any opinions on this?
 
You really think the 57 does a better job on snare than the M201? And I wouldn't favor the 81 over it either. Unless you want to spring for 2 MD421s, I'd keep the Beyer. I even prefer it over the 421, but I am in the minority there.
 
mshilarious said:
You really think the 57 does a better job on snare than the M201? And I wouldn't favor the 81 over it either. Unless you want to spring for 2 MD421s, I'd keep the Beyer. I even prefer it over the 421, but I am in the minority there.
Click to expand...

I've been using the M201 a lot on distorted guitar cab with most excellent results.
 
I don't really know, it's been a while. I'm going to have to give it a run this weekend when I get a few days off work.

Coincidentally (and since I haven't paid much attention to mics this past year) I came across some of your mics and listened to some clips...very cool! I might have to pick up a couple and see if they can do any good for overheads or toms. Would be perfect for an under-snare mic I'd imagine...do they distort under high SPL's? $150 for the drum mic package wouldn't be a terrible waste of money to experiment...

I notice that on pretty much all of the drums, I end up boosting around the fundamental to get more "beef" and boosting up the high end to get more attack/crack. I used to have some C418's on my toms (back when I had NO clue what I was doing behind the board :)) and I listened to those old clips and noticed a pretty good, if too bright sound. Probably a lot closer than the e604's I've been using.

Anyways, additional thinking, I'd still like to get a second NT2 (love that mic) which will also give me the option to do stereo room mics. I'll keep the 57 for sure as it's my fave on guitar, and I'll see how I like the M201 versus the 57 on the snare, if either of them compared to my C4 and NT2. I know for sure I'd like something other than a D112 on the kick though...it just sounds bad. Nasty mids, presence peak too low, and it seems to roll off the lows. I've heard the RE20 works well for kick due to transformer-less design? Or a modded 57?

Way too much info... :eek:
 
If you boost highs & lows on the kick, look at a B52 instead.

Edit: also I try to avoid commenting on my mics here, other than design questions, but please note the store is now *closed* for Christmas break.
 
mshilarious said:
If you boost highs & lows on the kick, look at a B52 instead.

Edit: also I try to avoid commenting on my mics here, other than design questions, but please note the store is now *closed* for Christmas break.
Click to expand...

So you'd say the Beta 52 is a smoother mic, frequency-wise?

Can you tell me if your mics are *designed* to not distort on high SPL sources? :D I made a real simple electret mic with a Panasonic capsule and it distorts like CRAZY with any SPL...even at a live show it distorts worse than a camcorder mic.
 
Yareek said:
I noticed my C4's on overheads and acoustic guitar are too "pretty" and laid back sounding...I'd like something more aggressive.
Click to expand...

You might try an Audio Technica 4033 and see what you think. Not sure exactly what you're trying to accomplish, but I do tend to think of it as being a pretty aggressive-sounding mic for the most part.
 
Yareek said:
So you'd say the Beta 52 is a smoother mic, frequency-wise?
Click to expand...

No, it's more tailored than the D112, but it sounds like that is what you want.

Can you tell me if your mics are *designed* to not distort on high SPL sources? :D I made a real simple electret mic with a Panasonic capsule and it distorts like CRAZY with any SPL...even at a live show it distorts worse than a camcorder mic.
Click to expand...

Well the Pana capsules have a couple of basic limitations that if not respected will make your life miserable. The first thing to keep in mind is that the capsule itself--that is, the diaphragm-backplate arrangement--can actually take high SPLs with no trouble. It isn't fond of wind blasts, but that is easily avoided.

However, the FET that is strapped to the thing is a relatively high-impedance device, and has limited potential for current. When you hook it straight to a typical mic preamp, you will roughly match impedances, which maximizes power transfer. However, given the supply voltage you need for the capsule to support high SPLs (in the range of 12V), the system will break down pretty quickly.

Thus you need to not only configure the circuit to maximize performance of the capsule, you also need to insert a current amplifier in between to buffer the capsule's FET.

Having said that, the omni capsules have another disadvantage in high SPL handling; that is the flat bass response. Since most music, and especially drums, has more energy in the bass region, and our ears are not particularly sensitive in that area, the apparent SPL handling for the omni capsules with loud sources is less than perhaps would be indicated by a simple A-weighted SPL meter reading.

One solution is to substitute a capsule with an inherent bass rolloff, and generally low sensitivity (since again it is not the diaphragm overloading, but the FET). The 6mm cardioid capsules fit the bill there. They have a few characteristics that make them undesireable for general use, such as high-end rolloff, and high noise, but that is not problematic for close-micing toms.

How's that? ;)
 
mshilarious said:
Well the Pana capsules have a couple of basic limitations that if not respected will make your life miserable. The first thing to keep in mind is that the capsule itself--that is, the diaphragm-backplate arrangement--can actually take high SPLs with no trouble. It isn't fond of wind blasts, but that is easily avoided.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity are the MSH-1's designed to avoid this problem? I didn't hear any distortion in any of the sound clips on the site, even on my big speakers. I know that's a concern with kick mics (especially placed just inside the hole in the front head) but should be okay on toms, correct?

However, the FET that is strapped to the thing is a relatively high-impedance device, and has limited potential for current. When you hook it straight to a typical mic preamp, you will roughly match impedances, which maximizes power transfer. However, given the supply voltage you need for the capsule to support high SPLs (in the range of 12V), the system will break down pretty quickly.

Thus you need to not only configure the circuit to maximize performance of the capsule, you also need to insert a current amplifier in between to buffer the capsule's FET.
Click to expand...

My ghetto mic was basically hardwired to an 1/8th inch headphone jack into a MiniDisc. It sounded fantastic on low volume sources (acoustic guitar jam sessions) but in an electric environment was pure distortion. From what you're saying, the capsule had no problem picking up the signal, but the onboard FET was being overdriven to hell and back, creating all sorts of nasty distortion. Sounds like you've fixed that then?

Having said that, the omni capsules have another disadvantage in high SPL handling; that is the flat bass response. Since most music, and especially drums, has more energy in the bass region, and our ears are not particularly sensitive in that area, the apparent SPL handling for the omni capsules with loud sources is less than perhaps would be indicated by a simple A-weighted SPL meter reading.

One solution is to substitute a capsule with an inherent bass rolloff, and generally low sensitivity (since again it is not the diaphragm overloading, but the FET). The 6mm cardioid capsules fit the bill there. They have a few characteristics that make them undesireable for general use, such as high-end rolloff, and high noise, but that is not problematic for close-micing toms.
Click to expand...

And this is the difference between the cardioid and omni versions, correct? So the cardioid versions would have the bass and high end rolloff, but should still be brighter than your average dynamic, right?

And regarding noise, the MSH-1C has 28 dBA self-noise whereas the C-418 has 38 dbA. That's actually pretty surprising. I don't remember the thing being THAT noisy.

How's that? ;)
Click to expand...

Great! Expect an order sometime in January if I can move some mics by then ;)
 
My ghetto mic was basically hardwired to an 1/8th inch headphone jack into a MiniDisc. It sounded fantastic on low volume sources (acoustic guitar jam sessions) but in an electric environment was pure distortion. From what you're saying, the capsule had no problem picking up the signal, but the onboard FET was being overdriven to hell and back, creating all sorts of nasty distortion. Sounds like you've fixed that then?
Click to expand...

Well I wouldn't say *I* fixed it, one solution to the problem is well-known and published. I have my own take on the circuit, but to the end user the result is the same.


And this is the difference between the cardioid and omni versions, correct? So the cardioid versions would have the bass and high end rolloff, but should still be brighter than your average dynamic, right?
Click to expand...

That depends on how bright you want the mic to be. The cardioid capsule can be tuned various ways depending on the size of the resonant chamber (which is fixed in the case of my mics), and the size of the vent holes. Generally I don't perceive brightness as desirable in tom mics, so I avoided it.

I don't remember the thing being THAT noisy.
Click to expand...

On toms it wouldn't matter. You are dealing with a peak signal that is on the order of 120-130dBSPL.
 
Fantastic, well have a happy holiday and hopefully I'll be able to get one of those drum mic kits and give it a run!

Know of anyone who has made any clips of the full drum mic kit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top