Vocal- LDC vs Nice Quality Dynamic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sir EL84
  • Start date Start date
S

Sir EL84

New member
Ok, I finally was able to arrange having the kids/wife out of the house for a full 24 hour period which I plan to devote to attempting vocals on original material. Now, in previous takes I've noticed that while I really appreciate a good dynamic mic's ability to essentially null the room-factor (Beyer M88) , AND in giving that smokey throaty sound, the end result was often lacked the sparkle / intellegibility of a condenser (AT4047 or 414).

If you were me- what would you do? The room is 13x13 untreated affair, curtains on two windows, a couch, wood floor w/ a large area rug. I do have a recently purchased Reflexion Filter, which I really haven't put through it's paces. If the M88 had more "air" it would be a done deal. The 4047 is really nice tho as well.

Suggestions?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SRR
try the reflexion filter and then use a couple of cheap mic stands or something else to hold up some blankets, a sleeping bag, whatever in back of you and see how that works for you. i got a cheap acoustic blanket and did that with my reflexion filter and it helped isolate from the room.
 
That 13 by 13 room is definitely trouble accoustically-- two equal dimensions will emphasize the same frequencies.

I say focus on the performance more than fussing endlessly with production. Your dynamic will help you get it set up and sounding pretty good without too much fuss.
 
You might try a tube LDC to capture that tone color without losing as much of the detail.
 
Depends on the pre. With a nice point to point pre, I actually really like dynamics, with a solid state or board pre, I would go LDC. Just my opinion.
 
I'd throw them both up - and maybe just take the high frequency material from the LDC. That way, you don't get the boominess of the room (from the LDC), but you still get *some* of the sparkle. It's worked for me before.

Good luck!

Thom
 
I don't think a tube LDC is going to do crap about fixing the room. Reflexion filter with blankets on mic stands sounds like a good idea. I also agree that an LDC will sound better with a not so great pre. The reflexion filter will take care of a lot of the sound from behind, not to mention a cardioid mic picks up way more sound from in front. I've had better results hanging blankets behind the singer. So yeah, try using reflexion filter behind mic, and blankets behind you. Also set up the mic stand somewhere closer to the center of the room, not near a wall or corner.
 
Thanks guys for the responses so far. My pre is a Grace 101. I'm definitely going to rig up something to put behind me- maybe a heavy packing blanket draped over a couple of stands.
 
Both

Hi,

Try this. Sing into the Beyer like you are used to. Use the proximity effect and work the mic.

Put the LDC 10-12 inches above the Beyer pointed at your forehead or the top of you nose. Then forget about it. (but don't bump your head into it)

Then you can choose either or both in the mix.

If you only have one Grace pre use it on the Beyer.

Thanks,

Hairy Larry
 
BRIEFCASEMANX said:
I don't think a tube LDC is going to do crap about fixing the room. Reflexion filter with blankets on mic stands sounds like a good idea. I also agree that an LDC will sound better with a not so great pre. The reflexion filter will take care of a lot of the sound from behind, not to mention a cardioid mic picks up way more sound from in front. I've had better results hanging blankets behind the singer. So yeah, try using reflexion filter behind mic, and blankets behind you. Also set up the mic stand somewhere closer to the center of the room, not near a wall or corner.

I'm going to disagree on several of your points. To minimize the effect of room sound, your goal is do minimize the level of first reflections relative to the direct sound. The middle of the room isn't the best spot because most sound sources are not omnidirectional except at very low frequencies. With vocals (and almost anything else other than drums, strings, harp, and possibly acoustic grand piano), you will never have problems from rear reflections; the amount of sound a singer projects backwards is inconsequential, and thus having a wall behind you should have little to no discernible effect on first reflections.

IMHO, your best bet is to set up the mic close to a wall, pointing towards the wall, fairly close to the middle of the wall. Most of your sound as a singer is projected forwards. By putting the singer facing outwards near the middle of the wall, the vast majority of the singer's sound has to go as far as possible before it reflects back. By placing it in the center from left to right, you also maximize the distance for side reflections. In so doing, you are also maximizing the signal (voice) to noise (reflections) ratio for your through-the-air pickup.

In a small room, mid-wall placement can make a big difference. The place I notice this most is when recording trumpet. Room reflections in an untreated room will utterly kill a trumpet recording if you put the mic in the middle of a room that size. Moving closer to a wall so that the reflections are coming from twice as far away significantly improves the sound without touching the room at all.

As for cardioid mics, IMHO, that's also backwards unless you're trying to eliminate some outside source of sound (e.g. a refrigerator in the next room). What you really want is an omni mic. It's counterintuitive, but hear me out. By using an omni mic, you can get very close to the mic without proximity effect. The closer you are to the mic, the stronger the voice is relative to the room. A cardioid mic is exactly what you don't want because it forces you to keep your distance.

The reasons I suggested a tube mic is that A. most have variable pattern, so you can use an omni pattern or figure-8 pattern and get much closer to the mic without too much boominess, B. the perceived "room problems" from recording with LDCs are probably not room problems at all---a 13'x13' room is not a small room, and should be quite reasonable for vocals by comparison with the rooms a lot of folks here record in---but rather, more a case of the original poster's aversion to the naturally harsh, brittle tone of a lot of FET LDCs, which can be tamed a lot by a proper tube circuit, and C. they aren't muddy like dynamics, which is what the original poster was complaining about.

Using a dynamic to "reduce room noise" won't work unless you're singing straight into a wall and getting comb filtering in the high frequencies or something. For a 13 foot room, if you're in the middle, the first frequency that will get boosted perfectly is a 6.5 foot wavelength, 171 Hz (give or take), then every octave above that---342 Hz, 684 Hz, etc. You're going to have peaks and nulls all through the spectrum, and the only ones a dynamic is likely to really help with are the ones at the high end.

Likewise, a reflection filter and/or blankets are only going to significantly help with the high frequencies, while in reality, the entire frequency range needs treatment. Thus, I'm not convinced that those will give the desired effect, either, though they will probably help somewhat. To me, the original post clearly screamed "cheap chinese mic is too bright, dynamic too dull, need a mic suggestion". :)

If I could suggest only two room treatments, it would be this: 1. isolate the mic stand from the wooden floor. Completely. Use a shock mount and add a rubber mat on top of the floor. That will remove a lot of muddiness. 2. Add bass traps in the corners.
 
You keep giving all this advice where he needs to buy all this stuff. Somehow I doubt he has time/money to go out and buy a multipatterned tube mic that's not "cheap chinese", go out and buy/build bass traps, and do the proper research and testing needed to get stuff that's not just hearsay from some guys on an internet forum, when he already has the day planned out probably pretty soon. I would love to hear your advice on non cheap chinese mics with "proper" tube circuits in the price range it looks like he can afford. Have you heard the 4047 to call it cheap sounding??? Somehow I doubt you have.

in retrospect, putting the mic in the center of the room was probably a bad idea. I was only thinking about room modes. In theory that's where room modes will null, but who knows what exactly is going to happen in reality and who wants to get out a measuring tape when setting up a mic. Most damage from room modes also happens below 300hz or so. Sing while walking around the room and see where it sounds the best, I guess. I don't think putting it RIGHT next to a wall would be good either. You wouldn't monitor that way.

When someone's singing outside (no walls) and you're behind them can you hear them? Yeah. I guess that shows that rear reflections can be a problem. Especially when a carioid mic isn't picking up a whole lot from the back, and he's got the reflexion filter there to boot.

You DO NOT want an omnidirection mic in a bad room. Being able to get 6 inches closer to the mic isn't going to be a good tradeoff for having WAYYY more room get into the mic. A figure 8 could work, especially with the reflexion filter. I'm guessing he wants to work with what he's got right now though.

He liked what the dynamic did with the room, which you say only gets rid of high frequencies. Therefore the LDC with reduced high frequency reflection is sounds like what he really wants. Blankets and Reflexion filter will work for this. Condensers just seem to pick up more room noise anyway, and not just at high frequencies. It's funny how when I got my Josephson C42's how I set them up and Immediately I heard someone walking around and doing dishes upstairs(not high frequency stuff), and with any of my dynamics I couldn't hear anything. Both mics gain adjusted for me talking into them.
 
dgatwood said:
IMHO, your best bet is to set up the mic close to a wall, pointing towards the wall, fairly close to the middle of the wall. Most of your sound as a singer is projected forwards. By putting the singer facing outwards near the middle of the wall, the vast majority of the singer's sound has to go as far as possible before it reflects back.

The only thing that I feel is wrong with that theory is demonstrated by doing this:

As a male singer this has proven to work for me anyway. Stand in the middle of a room, any room, and talk or sing. talking is just fine though for this example. Listen to the tone of your voice.
Now stand with your back against one of the room's walls, I mean actually touching it (in other words, as close as you can get to the wall), facing into the room. Now talk and listen to your voice. Unless something's wierd about your voice or the room is really really dead you should hear more bass when you stand against the wall, lots of low bass resonance that sounds artificial but gives you a sort of radio announcer voice. If you back off a few inches from the wall and face it and talk you should hear a harsher sounding high end to your voice due to early reflections from the wall (again, this is extreme and nobody records so close to an untreated wall normally).

That effect, while less pronounced if you're not actually right up close to the wall like that, still occurs to some degree when you sing close to a wall and facing into the room. If you mic toward the wall (which you'd have to in this case) then the mic is directly aimed at not only your voice (good thing) but the wall which is the source of the artificially bass boost and uneven resonances (generally a bad thing unless it's your intention).

That's why I always recommend this arrangement in any room, even the best ones: stand a little out of the middle of the room, maybe on the 1/3 point, and equal between the two side walls more or less, singing into the room if you're using a mic with any pickup behind it (figure 8, omni, hypercardoid, etc) since that's the only way the room sound will be picked up behind the mic and therefore useful to the recording. If you're using a cardoid mic (which most people are) with as little as possible pickup behind the mic 180 degrees from the singer, then stand in the same location but face the closer wall with the mic obviously facing you (closer to the wall yet of course). This picks up your voice great plus some of the longest early-reflection from the longer walls of the room while avoiding the shortest early reflection from the nearest wall which is generally a bad thing in such a small room.

Of course your mileage may vary, but I really don't think that aiming a mic close to a singer with a wall close behind the singer is going to emphasize the good stuff (larger room acoustics) but is instead going to emphasize the less desirable nearest-wall early reflection plus the probably undesirable wall bass resonances.
 
oh yes, and please don't use an omni mic in a small room for vocal recordings, and for the trumpet player poster, if you want to reduce or avoid proximity effect use a SDC instead of a LDC for recording your trumpet, but in reality I think that if proximity effect is a problem for you when you record trumpet then your mic is much too close to your horn compared to how many of us mic an instrument like that for the most neutral and truthful pickup.

I'm sure omni works well for you but there are plenty of ways to make the preferred small room recording mic (cardoid in other words) work great for micing brass in a small room. But yes, omni or figure 8 work ok too and are easier to setup since you can get a good sound without knowing how to really place a mic properly, and in fact any mic when blasted by an instrument with high sound level output like a trumpet will get so much more direct sound than reflected sound that it works ok no matter what, but still, for me at least, the sound of a small not-great sounding room will negate the use of an omni mic pretty much completely, so I simply never use one in a room like that.

But one man's bread and butter doesn't necessarily mean anything for another man, so just is just my humble opinion :-)

Cheers,
Don Kelley
double take recording
 
speaking of buying multipattern mics, the best of breed at lowest price is cad m-179 (not tube though, which I actually think is a good thing for this mic), and yes you can for somewhat more buy an apex 460 (tube multipattern mic) or it's clones or something similar but possibly slightly better sounding for a little more yet (without getting into big big bucks), but the 460 has higher noise and is not nearly as versatile (limited low freq response, incredibly sharply peaked high freq) plus it needs a replacement tube right out of the box with lower gain due to incorrect tube choice for the circuit design (unless you like loud sources like trumpet distorting the mic by overdriving it's internal transformer like crazy from the output of the tube). There are tube mics that offer multipattern, but many more that don't, and it's not probably a good assumption that saying tube mic actually equates to saying cheap multi-pattern mic, which sort of sounds like was your true intention.

That being said, I do think a cheap multipattern mic is a great learning tool to understand the pros and cons of these mic pickup patterns, but the mics this guy owns blow away a cheap multipattern tube mic any day so might as well stick with quality I think. But with some extra cash to spend sometime, picking up one, or my recommendation of a cad m-179 (which actually has continuously variable pattern adjustment, way more advanced technology than that of a switchable 7-pattern tube mic), then one can get some great recordings and see what, maybe, a supercardoid or hypercardoid pattern has to offer, or certainly a figure 8 (although figure 8 is available on many other mics as well, including the 414 if I'm not mistaken that he mentioned in his first post). Also, either a good 460 (they have terrible QA at apex so try your luck and get the replacement tube) or an m179 are great mics for the price, the 179 in particular can compete with $2000 mics, so are useful investments for someone looking to spend some money.

However I don't think the poster was looking to buy a mic unless absolutely necessary...

Cheers
Don
 
Sir EL84 said:
Thanks guys for the responses so far. My pre is a Grace 101. I'm definitely going to rig up something to put behind me- maybe a heavy packing blanket draped over a couple of stands.
The blanket behind is a good option when using the Reflexion Filter.
How about blankets all the way around? :rolleyes:
I'm not quite sure, after all of this, what is happening in the microphone arena for your project.
The CAD M9 is a relatively inexpensive cardioid only tube mic that sells for $299 and provides a nice bit of "air" but not overly so like so many seem to these days.
I'm an sE fan and will vouch for the Z3300A FET and Z5600A tube to help in the "air" department but for more money.
What is your vocal range?
If you are bassy (Basie?) baritone/low tenorish, the CADM9/Z3300A/or Z5600A will work nicely.
If you are more tenor/alto, a mic with a flatter hi-end response like the sE SE2200A or something with a similar response pattern might be a better choice.
With the Grace 101, any type of added character will be coming from you, the room and the mic.
Sounds like fun! :D
 
dkelley said:
That's why I always recommend this arrangement in any room, even the best ones: stand a little out of the middle of the room, maybe on the 1/3 point, and equal between the two side walls more or less, singing into the room

I think this is a good idea.
 
dkelley said:
Now stand with your back against one of the room's walls, I mean actually touching it (in other words, as close as you can get to the wall), facing into the room. Now talk and listen to your voice. Unless something's wierd about your voice or the room is really really dead you should hear more bass when you stand against the wall, lots of low bass resonance that sounds artificial but gives you a sort of radio announcer voice.

I didn't literally mean right against the wall. I normally put myself... probably three feet out or so. If I put myself right in front of the wall, I'd be singing into the backs of chairs and/or a lamp.... :)

dkelley said:
That's why I always recommend this arrangement in any room, even the best ones: stand a little out of the middle of the room, maybe on the 1/3 point, and equal between the two side walls more or less, singing into the room if you're using a mic with any pickup behind it (figure 8, omni, hypercardoid, etc) since that's the only way the room sound will be picked up behind the mic and therefore useful to the recording.

We agree on that arrangement.


dkelley said:
If you're using a cardoid mic (which most people are) with as little as possible pickup behind the mic 180 degrees from the singer, then stand in the same location but face the closer wall with the mic obviously facing you (closer to the wall yet of course). This picks up your voice great plus some of the longest early-reflection from the longer walls of the room while avoiding the shortest early reflection from the nearest wall which is generally a bad thing in such a small room.

I don't see how that could possibly work well. A cardioid mic isn't null for the back half. It's null for maybe 5 degrees in the very back. You'd A. have to have a perfectly flat wall, B. have to have the back pointing exactly at the wall, and C. still be picking up low and midrange reflections off the wall, since the pickup pattern of any microphone will always be omnidirectional (approximately) at low frequencies.
 
BRIEFCASEMANX said:
You DO NOT want an omnidirection mic in a bad room. Being able to get 6 inches closer to the mic isn't going to be a good tradeoff for having WAYYY more room get into the mic. A figure 8 could work, especially with the reflexion filter. I'm guessing he wants to work with what he's got right now though.

Depends on how far away you have to move the cardioid to avoid boominess. Remember the inverse square law. The volume drops off proportional to the distance squared. A change from... let's say two feet to three inches means the sound level doubles three times, give or take, so if I understand correctly, that's about a 30 dB increase in the source volume as seen by the mic. That's more than the rejection from a cardioid mic from anywhere other than the exact rear of the mic.

Of course, the MIX review of the AT4047 mic said that for vocals, 6-8" is the optimal distance. If the original poster is miking it at that distance, using an omni pattern probably won't reduce the room much, if any.

That said, you're probably right that a figure-8 would probably work better, as it would get rid of a lot of the side reflections (which a cardioid would not do nearly as well).

BRIEFCASEMANX said:
You keep giving all this advice where he needs to buy all this stuff. Somehow I doubt he has time/money to go out and buy a multipatterned tube mic that's not "cheap chinese", go out and buy/build bass traps, and do the proper research and testing needed to get stuff that's not just hearsay from some guys on an internet forum, when he already has the day planned out probably pretty soon.

Bass traps are easy. A bass trap is fundamentally just a very large, unmovable mass.... For a quick and dirty bass trap, take a plastic garbage can and fill it to the top with sand. Wrap it with a blanket so that it won't become a reflection surface for high frequencies. Repeat as needed. WARNING: You will need more than one friend to help you lift a garbage can full of sand. :D

Either that or build a couple of these:

http://www.diy-home-theater-design.com/bass-trap-build.html
 
dgatwood said:
Bass traps are easy. A bass trap is fundamentally just a very large, unmovable mass.... For a quick and dirty bass trap, take a plastic garbage can and fill it to the top with sand. Wrap it with a blanket so that it won't become a reflection surface for high frequencies. Repeat as needed. WARNING: You will need more than one friend to help you lift a garbage can full of sand. :D

Either that or build a couple of these:

http://www.diy-home-theater-design.com/bass-trap-build.html

A plastic garbage can is not breathable, if your absorbtive material is covered by something you want it to be thin and breathable. Also, does sand have good absortive qualities?
 
Back
Top