Large Diaphram Condensor Mics or Small Diaphram Condensor Mics?

[KINNORDAVIYD]

I'm assuming that I am speaking to acoustic guitar players. I'm wondering what kind of condensor microphone you all find the best applicable to acoustic guitar, Large Diaphram Condensor Mics or Small Diaphram Condensor Mics? I've heard from both sides on the Live Sound forum, now I'd like to hear from you all.

 

-TIM:freak:

[Cripes]

Got a coin to toss? This is the way I have experienced it- others may agree or disagree but - I think it largely depends on the voice of your guitar.

If the guitar is boomy and resonant a large diaphragm will pick that up quite readily and you will lose the mids and highs in what turns out to be a muddy recording of, well, boomy resonance. If this applies, then I would get one or two small condenser mics and place them pointed at the bridge and 10th-12th frets to start with, and about 12 inches away.

If the guitar does not have that boomy resonance and is better balanced try a large condenser mic at the 12th fret, same distance.

Maple and mahogany with spruce tops are less boomy in my experience. Spruce over rosewood starts to get deep and cedar over rosewood really can befuddle a large condenser mic. Other factors to be considered are the size of the soundbox as a large one can change the outcome completely and regardless of woods/construction.

So, quiet guitars with little resonance (sustain) get the large diaphragm and loud ones that ring forever get small ones. After that, placement is a whole other experiment.

[rkyochim]

I think it depends entirely on the the situation.......live or recording?....large or small room?....size of guitar?....in my experience it is great to have both... for recording, a small dia aimed at the spot where the neck meets soundhole at a distance of 6 to 12 inches and a large dia somewhere further back depending on room acoustics.........for live sound without a pickup in a small venue I think 2 small dia's works well, experiment with placement. But if I could only use one I would choose the small for live and the large to record....Best of luck!!!

[riffmeister]

for studio recording, I generally use one of each, small diaphram close mic'd at the 12th fret, large diaphram a couple of feet away aimed at the bridge. then blend to taste in the mixdown.


.

[min7b5]

for studio recording, I generally use one of each, small diaphram close mic'd at the 12th fret, large diaphram a couple of feet away aimed at the bridge. then blend to taste in the mixdown..

 

 

Me too.

 

I made my first two CDs with two and three, large diaphragm condensers, but for third we

[sdelsolray]

 

Got a coin to toss? This is the way I have experienced it- others may agree or disagree but - I think it largely depends on the voice of your guitar. If the guitar is boomy and resonant a large diaphragm will pick that up quite readily and you will lose the mids and highs in what turns out to be a muddy recording of, well, boomy resonance. If this applies, then I would get one or two small condenser mics and place them pointed at the bridge and 10th-12th frets to start with, and about 12 inches away. If the guitar does not have that boomy resonance and is better balanced try a large condenser mic at the 12th fret, same distance. Maple and mahogany with spruce tops are less boomy in my experience. Spruce over rosewood starts to get deep and cedar over rosewood really can befuddle a large condenser mic. Other factors to be considered are the size of the soundbox as a large one can change the outcome completely and regardless of woods/construction. So, quiet guitars with little resonance (sustain) get the large diaphragm and loud ones that ring forever get small ones. After that, placement is a whole other experiment.

 

 

Let's dispel yet another urban legend. What a mic will "hear" depends not so much on the size of the diaphragm but on the mic's designed frequency response, the mic's amplifier design, it's polar pattern and the mic's placement in relation to the source. The size of the diaphragm does factor in with regard to transient response and off axis response, among a few other things (at least these traits tend to be different between large diaphragm and small diaphragm mics).

[KINNORDAVIYD]

Ok, I am worried a little about ambient sound from other instruments on stage. I'm interested in acoustic music, so I do not plan to use a electronic pickup or a guitar amp. I would suppose that the LD Mics are more omni directional than are the SD mics?

[min7b5]

Someone will no doubt chime in soon with a more technical response, but my own anecdotal experience as a working acoustic musician is that SD

[riffmeister]

for live stuff I use a supercardiod dyanmic mic, I've found condensors to be too sensitive and finicky. a vocal mic, the Shure SM87 beta, has worked well for me.


.

[min7b5]

I only play solo instrumental, and to usually less than hundred people, so I don

[KINNORDAVIYD]

I notice that Union Station and Allison Krause use LD Condensors in concert.
Jerry Douglas uses an LD on his dobro and Allison uses an LD for her Fiddle. I think one his used on each of the instruments played.

[min7b5]

I notice that Union Station and Allison Krause use LD Condensors in concert. Jerry Douglas uses an LD on his dobro and Allison uses an LD for her Fiddle...

 

 

I

[KINNORDAVIYD]

I found a deal on an AT Pro 37 for around $50 - What should I do?

[min7b5]

Buy it. If not, can you turn me on to it? I can always use another.

People are gonna say it

[Jon Hiller]

If I'm recording I actually prefer my Stedman N90, which is a large-diaphragm dynamic, to most condensors, unless I am using more than one mic, at which point the mix can vary. Live, I'd normally use a small-diaphragm for more directionality/less outside noise bleeding in.

[whit townsend]

Ok, I am worried a little about ambient sound from other instruments on stage. I'm interested in acoustic music, so I do not plan to use a electronic pickup or a guitar amp. I would suppose that the LD Mics are more omni directional than are the SD mics?

 

 

In that case, if your talking just you guitar I'd go with a SD with a fairly tight pattern. That AT will work just fine. I've had good results with cheap Nadys in my bluegrass band. We play and sing around a large Rode condenser, and use a couple of cheap Nadys as side mics for the instr that needs to be out front but the player dosnt need to sing at the moment. Sometimes we mic the upright, sometimes not. Usually its loud enough to come thru the big condenser w/no mic of its own. THe "dance" in and out from around a big mic requires some choreography, but adds to the show. Gotta be careful with monitors useing those hot condensers. Best to use none and stay close enough to each other to hear.

 

Agree tho a good dynamic, like a beta 57 would work just fine and not be finiky at all if your just gonna stand in one spot.You may get a hotter, cleaner, clearer sound from a condenser, but they are trickier to use, they pick up too good in a lot of less than ideal live situations.

[jerime]

For live situations, buy a 57 or strongly consider a good acoustic pickup. I would go with the pickup personally. Much less hassle and with a good one I don't think you'll compromise much on sound. Just DI into the board.

[KINNORDAVIYD]

No pickups for me. I've been playing acoustic guitar for 27 years now and I've been through the pickup faze. In fact, my acoustic-electric has a bridge pickup. I don't like the sound. To much high and not enough low end. I've also used a Dean Markley in-hole pickup. It was alright, then. I've owned digital and analog effects processors and guitar amps. I guess I've become an acoustic purist in my old age. I'm getting the AT Pro 37. Good mic!

[les_rokr]

If you have a recording interface with at least two phantom power channels, record your acoustic using both at one time. Play them back separately to see which you like better.