7 Nov
2002
7 Nov
'02
12:30 p.m.
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 11:35:37PM +0900, Patrick
Shirkey wrote:
This is all true. But I would say if you have a choice between one of
any type of mic a good condenser is the best option. Unless you don't
have phantom power capabilites, then, you should go with dynamic and the
Shure range offer extremely good price/performance. No doubt about that.
Saying that though I use Shure copies. They claim to be exact replicas.
So far they have lived up to all expectations.
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
For the discerning hardware connoisseur
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide
========================================
"Um...symbol_get and symbol_put... They're
kindof like does anyone remember like get_symbol
and put_symbol I think we used to have..."
- Rusty Russell in his talk on the module subsystem
You will
need to get at least one condenser mic as well. They are the best for
recording.
Now Patrick, you should know you can't make blanket statements
like that where audio is concerned :-p
It depends a lot on *what* you're recording, and on the mic
in question. There is certainly no shortage of bad condenser mics
on the market. I'd take a good dynamic mic (Sennheiser MD-421
or 441, EV RE-20, Shure SM-7 to name a few) over crap
(but common) condensers like the AKG CS-1000 any day.
There are many applications where dynamic mics are still
the mic of choice (notably close-miking drums and
amplifiers, but also sometimes rock vocals).
Remember Michael Jackson's "Thriller"? One of the
biggest-selling records ever? They could have
used any microphone in the world for lead vocals, and
they chose a Shure SM-7. Whatever you think of the music,
there's no denying that it's a top-notch pop vocal recording.
And let's not forget ribbon mics.
I would *love* to be able to afford a Royer, but even
a Beyer M-500 or something would be nice to have
and would do pretty well on just about any source
except really really quiet stuff.