The High Freq. Life

[Drake19]

Hey everybody. I've been listening to mic demos today, and I think I like dynamics and ribbons better than condensers. I don't know: maybe I've been listening to too many 50's, 60’s and 70's jazz and r&b albums. There are some current albums that I like a lot. I'm in love with the Dana Owens album. I also have a Harry Connick Jr. album that I think sounds awesome. You see: I've been listening to the R84, M160 and the SM57 and they all sound much more like those trite descriptions AE'S and we amateur AE'S like to throw around to sound smart and cool. You know: warm, full, and round. Seriously though, the (note: cheap-mid ranged priced) condensers I've been listening to have been sounding thin and brittle. I must admit that I liked the AKG 451E and the AKG 414B TLII. I can see...uhhh, hear the reasons for using a bright mic on an instrument in a dense mix, but is it me or does any one else prefer the sound of less hyped mics than those of the super-ultra hyped mics?

 

[chessrock]

I'm right with ya' on that one.

 

[Drake19]

Yes!!! Chessrock doesn't hate me! He loves me. He didn't direct his misguided anger at me by chewing me up and spiting me out!

Just playin' man.

 

[punkin]

I'm with you on that...mostly...there's a lot of sales pressures, hype on the lower end microphone market. Then there are those who get sucked into it...they buy it, don't know what they've got and are convinced they've got the latest and greatest...the hype expands and more people get sucked into it.

Fact is...most people never get to hear an objective mic test. Making matters worse, the entry level buyer may not really know what a good mix sounds like or how to achieve it.

Your statement about ribbons sounding better than condensor...I don't know 'bout that (IMHO) but I've met some younger, less experienced musicians (NOT tracking techs or wanna be sound engineers)...musicians, who actually like that thin, bright, brittle sound in their lead parts. I think some of it has to do with what the new crowd is raised on that determines what a good sound is.

It will all work out in the end.

 

[OneArmedScissor]

You know what I've always wondered?

Cheap condensers always seem to have a hyped high end. Is that just what happens when you rip off an expensive mic, but with cheap components (which is the case with almost all of them), or is it by design, so that they sound a little brighter, clearer, and therefore, supposedly "better" on a quick listen?

 

[AGCurry]

Whatever works. I have a wonderful collection of quality ribbon and dynamic mics, and I'm more likely to use them for a lot of stuff than my decent but not high-end condensors. But those jazz albums - even from the 50s - were likely recorded on condensors. My favorite jazz album, Kind of Blue (Miles Davis), has U47s all over it.

 

[chessrock]

Ya, know . . . come to think of it, the only thing I really ever use condensers on exclusively are overheads.

. . . and accoustic guitar, but maybe only half the people I record even use any accoustic on their tracks.

As for vocals, half the time I use a Shure SM-7, an Electrovoice or a Beyer.

Hmmm. Now that I think of it, many of the projects I track use condensers only on the drum overheads, and that's it. Interesting.

 

[punkin]

Same here...pretty much but staying with quality units. I usually like the way the acoustic instruments sound as they are. The cheap units seem to be aritificially EQ'd. The room acoustics seem to be my biggeest battle. Close micing makes this much easier.

I've swept most of my mics in their customary application an location. I pretty much know how much EQ each will need before I ever start tracking. Guess you could say that I've got some EQ presets for each of the mics. I suspect you could work even the over-hyped mics once you understand how they'll respond.

 

[Drake19]

Thanks everyone for joining in on my little disscusion. I hope no one mistakes me and thinks I'm against all condensers, or mics with a hyped top, or even a suttle bump in the 10-12k area. However, I've been turned off lately to thin sounding commercial mixes, which seem to be prevelent in pop music today. I'm postive mics with a bright sound can sound excelent with proper mic selection, placement and eqing. My tastes lean towards a mellower response. I guess I just have that british frame of mind when it comes to tracking, where I'd rather start with the sound I have in my head, rather than create it in the mix. So, I'd rather print my sound to tape.

Scissor: I think "lower end" companys might be designing their mics with the idea that many young people who listen to mostly pop, who want to get into recording, will want to sound just like what they hear on the radio. And it seems to me that the trend is to get everything sounding nice and bright.But I've also wondered about the mics coming out that way because of cheap components.
Right quick chessrock: Do find your self boosting in the high frequencys since you're using mostly dynamics?

 

[OneArmedScissor]

I think that thin sound of pop music comes from a combination of the notorious smiley face EQ, and then a crushing amount of compression.

Someday, I want to see if I can hear a high quality pop recording BEFORE it gets mastered.