Yes, I should state the intention. I have a SM58 knockoff (by Fender) that I use on hand drums. My interest de jeur is to record a female vocalist. I am an electrical engineer by education, so am amenable to freq charts, THD, spatial plots and such. But the "warm" thing seems to me empty. Seems like judicious EQ should get you what you want, given that the transducer is coming up with a clean reproduction to begin with. But then one gets into subjectivity and black magic again. I am looking a Studio Projects B1, for instance.

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 10:43:47AM -1000, Alastair Couper wrote: Get thee to the ProSoundWeb forums and read Harvey Gerst's many many posts on related topics. Harvey is a great engineer with decades of experience who runs a "bottom-feeder" studio and has a knack for finding the stuff worth having at the low end of the price range. http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/f/32/0 There's also "the big thread" that in its slightly edited PDF form is a great read about mics in general... 80 pages on theory, specs, mic choice, placement, etc. You're bound to learn something. http://www.kset.org/music/pub/ChatWithHarvey.pdf -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com

On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 22:43, Alastair Couper wrote: Don't forget transient response (condenser mics do it better) and compression (tube preamps do it better). I bought a Studio Projects C1 a few months back. The difference between the C1 and my SM58 is enormous for things that have more high frequency energy (shakers, tambourine etc), and noticeable for vocals, especially female. I wouldn't use the SM58 for vocals anymore, but it still works well as a guitar amp mic. I played with a Rode NT3 and an AKG C414 a while back, and IIRC, the C1 is a little harsher, but that's probably the gentle glow of memory. bye John

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 10:43:47AM -1000, Alastair Couper wrote: with vocals the choice of mic is even more subjective and dependent on what you are recording. As somebody said with preamps, it's certainly a case of matching a mic to the voice you want to record. Trouble is it doesn't come up with a clean response in the first place. Better to get a mic that sounds about right than to get one that really does't suit the voice/room/whatever and then try to fix it with EQ that will never quite match the mic. Not really. The human ear-brain system is very sensitive to certain cues for direction and depth; a mic with a perfect on-axis response whose response off axis is very poor will pick up room reflections that don't sound right, in a very subtle way. The off-axis response is just one of many small but important differences between a good mic and a bad one. Do a Google groups search on group:rec.audio.pro and your mic of choice. There will be some derision if if's a cheap mic, but it's worth going through the results because you will often get: - opinions from people in the industry who've actually used it - opinions from people with good ears - suggestions about what specific instruments or types of voice it's good/bad for Two other things: You can get a lot of mileage out any mic by learning about mic placement, and it's always best to try a mic out, or better still try several and choose with your own ears. Ideally take your vocalist along to the store to test mics. -- Anahata anahata(a)treewind.co.uk -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:50:10 -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Indeed. A few hours spent looking over mic related posts left me just as disoriented as before. That is why I come to places like THIS, with high levels of decorum and respect. Thanks!! to everyone for putting in their two cents worth. What I get from all that I have read now is that there is no substitute for auditioning. Buying something untested is a pig in the poke, at least in the $$$ I can afford. I see there are two main strands in music makers: those that are most interested in and sensitive to the sound, and those that are mainly hearing the content. I seem to be in the latter. I am happy listening to a less than excellent recording of a great performance, but can't be bothered with a mediocre performance, no matter how much $$$ was thrown at the gear used.

Jan Depner wrote: No disrespect meant to anyone reading this thread... ;-) - Mark

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 07:42:45AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: http://www.mxlmics.com/condencer_mic/condenser_index.html Rumor has it that support is pretty responsive, or at least was last time i asked a couple years ago. I've never needed to call them myself. I'll probably pick up one or two of the V67 myself one of these days. I don't have it currently, I have the MXL 1006 which is okay but to my ears it has a pretty harsh top end and by most accounts the V67G is significantly better than most of the other MXL mics (the other oft-reported winner is the 603). -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com

On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 13:58, Mark Knecht wrote: I have a 603 and really like it. I've also read that the V69 tube mic is very good. I'm really rough on equipment and my two Marshall's have gone through the mill a couple of times (left in the car in south Mississippi in the summertime). They take a licking but keep on ticking ;-) Jan

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 01:15:42PM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: Yeah, but I don't believe freq response graphs from ANY manufacturer anyway :-) The thing with the 1006 is that i can't seem to tame the peak to my taste with EQ. It still sounds a bit harsh even with the treble heavily rolled off. Dunno what accounts for that. Might be partly my mackie preamps which are not exactly the gentlest-sounding things around :-) -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com

On Monday 09 August 2004 01:02 pm, Jack Bowling wrote: Hehe, you know what Jenna Jameson says ;) Sorry guy, it was too easy

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 13:39:20 +0100 tim hall <tech(a)glastonburymusic.org.uk> wrote: I have a pair of the Oktava MK-319's and I have to say that I'm very happy with them, within limits. What limits? Well, the bodies can be rather resonant, adding a ringing tone to the recording if they're mounted with no consideration for shock absorption, and I absolutely cannot use them in conjunction with my Behringer T1953 tube preamp - the sound is far to brittle when I use the 2 of them together. I like the 319's for some vocals, some acoustic instruments, as drum overheads, and for live stereo recording, which I do a fair amount of. PZMs are certainly still available; Crown sells them for a relatively low amount of money. I like them for drum overheads, but one trick I found is that if I'm recording drums in my basement, which is relatively small, I'll set up the kit to face a wall and be 4-5 feet back from it, and I'll hang a PZM on that wall. While there's no stereo separation to it, it gives me a good signal to mix in for a different kind of ambience that isn't given by the overheads - it's got more of the kick drum than the overheads will pick up, which can be a Good Thing sometimes. -- ====================================================================== Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa