Jump to content

Your favourite Mic and why....

wilsoneffectsll

By wilsoneffectsll
in Effects and Processors

Recommended Posts

Phil O'Keefe Rookie

Phil O'Keefe

Posted
Posted

For guitars I love love love ribbon microphones. I have tried a lot of different ribbons over the years, form pricey to cheap and I gotta say not only because its really affordable but the proof was in the pudding when it came to tracking guitars and I can't say enough good things about the Cascade Fathead ll with the Lundahl tranny.

 

Have you messed with the ones with the stock transformers SAL?

 

When it comes to drums... way back in the day when I bought my first ADAT, I rented a slew of mics, and I got the best sounds from an AKG 414 in Omni placed about 3' away from the snare, yet angled towards the two rack toms...

 

Aaah - one-mic drum kit techniques. Always fun!

 

Maybe it was the room...

 

It's nearly always a factor and major contributor to the sound of the recording.

 

Maybe it was the drum kit...

 

Sources matter. A lot.

 

Maybe it was the player...

 

Well a player isn't going to usually be able to make up for sucky mic positioning, but good playing shines through - even on fairly cruddy recordings. A great player makes any recording sound better. :)

 

I have know idea but that one mic in that spot on that day just sounded so {censored}ing good.

 

:cool: Do you remember which 414 it was SAL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
eric.chambers Newbie

eric.chambers

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

By the time the foam's gone, the mic is long out of warranty. A full overhaul from EV (there are others who do it too) is a bit over two hundred bucks last time I checked, and if the foam has crumbled, it often takes the capsule with it - it should be replaced too for optimal performance. Without the foam to cushion it, the capsule and diaphragm can be easily damaged.

 

 

 

Went down there last week to look at the mic and seems to be solid. They did give me a good price, so I put some money down. Can't hardly wait!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
ILOVEMYFENDER Newbie

ILOVEMYFENDER

Posted
  • Members
Posted

On a small budget:

Audio Technica AT2035 (great for vocals, acoustics, amps, percussion)

Digital Reference DRI100 (less harsh 57 clone, use it on everything listed before but mostly for background stuff as it doesn't capture as much high end as the AT)

Shure SM58 (used on acoustic, I strangely love the sound of it)

 

All those went to this effect:

http://loganarcher.bandcamp.com/album/the-end-of-an-age

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
DrJonesHC Newbie

DrJonesHC

Posted
  • Members
Posted
Ha ha, thanks, man. Remember, though, that's the blumlein (thanks Phil) pair configuration, though, so you need two of them to get that specific sound. One does sound pretty good by itself, but I found this setup most accurate to what was going on in the room.


Basically what you do is point one mic at the sound source and the other is mounted right below it at a 90 degree angle (rotationally) from the other. This "sideways" mic produces one track which you make a copy of so you have two. Then you pan one hard left and one hard right and invert the phase on one of them. The one that's pointed facing the source is mixed in the center. This sounds more tricky than it is.



Actually, what you are described is the "Mid/Side" technique, NOT Blumlein. Blumlein consists of a pair of crossed bi-directional (figure-8) mics set up in X/Y format. Mid/Side consists of two mics: one of them being figure-8 and the other one usually cardioid. The cardioid mic (the "mid" mic) is pointed directly at the source, and the figure-8 mic is pointed with the null part of the mic facing the source. Then you duplicate the track and invert the phase on one of them and hard pan them left and right as you described.

The more you know... :thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
eric.chambers Newbie

eric.chambers

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Actually, what you are described is the "Mid/Side" technique, NOT Blumlein. Blumlein consists of a pair of crossed bi-directional (figure-8) mics set up in X/Y format. Mid/Side consists of two mics: one of them being figure-8 and the other one usually cardioid. The cardioid mic (the "mid" mic) is pointed directly at the source, and the figure-8 mic is pointed with the null part of the mic facing the source. Then you duplicate the track and invert the phase on one of them and hard pan them left and right as you described.


The more you know...
:thu:

 

huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
V Newbie

V

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Actually, what you are described is the "Mid/Side" technique, NOT Blumlein. Blumlein consists of a pair of crossed bi-directional (figure-8) mics set up in X/Y format. Mid/Side consists of two mics: one of them being figure-8 and the other one usually cardioid. The cardioid mic (the "mid" mic) is pointed directly at the source, and the figure-8 mic is pointed with the null part of the mic facing the source. Then you duplicate the track and invert the phase on one of them and hard pan them left and right as you described.


The more you know...
:thu:

 

I was under the impression there were two different Blumlein techniques. One is mid/side and the other being x/y. He developed both, I believe.

 

Anyway, the fatheads i have are the standard transformer ones. Sound good to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil O'Keefe Rookie

Phil O'Keefe

Posted
Posted

I was under the impression there were two different Blumlein techniques. One is mid/side and the other being x/y. He developed both, I believe.

 

We now have three different stereo microphone techniques on the table and under discussion: Blumlein stereo, Mid-Side stereo and X/Y stereo. They're not the same - each is different from the others.

 

Blumlein stereo is a coincident pair of figure-8 microphones that are placed 90 degrees off-axis from each other, with each mic 45 degrees off-center from the center of the sound source(s) you're recording.

 

Fig1.JPG

 

http://www.harmonycentral.com/docs/DOC-1721

 

Mid-Side, it its traditional form, uses a bi-directional mic for the "side" information along with a center microphone - usually a cardioid, but some modern variations use omnis and occasionally even another figure-8 / bi-directional microphone. The center or "mid" mic is pointed directly at the sound source, while the second or "side" mic is positioned so it's aimed 90 degrees off-axis from the source. In the picture below, the top mic (ELUX 251) is set to figure-8 and is pointed to the sides, while the bottom mic (E250) is cardioid and pointed directly at the camera / "sound source:"

 

Fig.1.jpg

 

http://www.harmonycentral.com/docs/DOC-1722

 

Yes, Alan Dower Blumlein invented both of these techniques, and is generally considered to be the father and inventor of modern stereo audio recording and reproduction.

 

I haven't posted an article on XY stereo yet, but it's basically a coincident (capsules as close together as physically possible) pair of cardioid microphones placed with the bodies of the microphones at a 90 degree angle to each other. Some other stereo techniques use similar coincident and near-coincident placements with angles up to 135 degrees or so. For example ORTF uses a 110 degree angle with near-coincident diaphragms placed 17cm apart.

 

Anyway, the fatheads i have are the standard transformer ones. Sound good to me.

 

Cool - those are the ones I reviewed. I was quite impressed actually. The ones with the Cinemag and Lundahl transformers are said to sound a bit more open and extended in their overall frequency response - especially in the highs. I could see that being useful for use as room mikes and drum overheads, but you probably won't miss the extra reach at all if you're mainly using them to mic up guitar amps or Leslie speakers from a keyboard rig - both of which are tasks the standard Fathead II's excel at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
DrJonesHC Newbie

DrJonesHC

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

I was under the impression there were two different Blumlein techniques. One is mid/side and the other being x/y. He developed both, I believe.

 

 

 

Nope, just the crossed figure-8 microphone technique is called a "Blumlein Pair".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
raj1988 Newbie

raj1988

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 


I'm also a big fan of Audix mikes - especially the D series and the i5. AKG C 414's can work great on not only acoustic guitars, but guitar amps.... but not all 414's are created equal - there have been several "versions" of them over the years...

 

 

Hi Phil

 

Ive been looking at a C414 XLII pair to do the drum OH duties as well using one for the guitar amp. Have u ever compared it with the XLS model? Do you think it will work well in combination with an SM57? or would an i5 be better?

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
six acre lake Newbie

six acre lake

Posted
  • Members
Posted




Sources matter. A lot.




Well a player isn't going to usually be able to make up for sucky mic positioning, but good playing shines through - even on fairly cruddy recordings. A great player makes any recording sound better.
:)



:cool:
Do you remember which 414 it was SAL?

 

I don't remember which 414 it was... wish I did cause that thing sounded awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil O'Keefe Rookie

Phil O'Keefe

Posted
Posted

Hi Phil


Ive been looking at a C414 XLII pair to do the drum OH duties as well using one for the guitar amp. Have u ever compared it with the XLS model? Do you think it will work well in combination with an SM57? or would an i5 be better?


Thanks

 

 

Unfortunately, I have not really spent any quality time with the newer 414's, although I am very familiar with the earlier ones. The C-414 XL II replaced the C-414 TL II. The TL II was developed primarily as a vocal mic, and has a bit more presence peak to it than the flatter B-ULS, which is the predecessor to the current XLS. I think they've tried to keep that same relative approach with the newer / replacement models, and a quick look at their frequency response plots would seem to support that.

 

XL II:

 

http://www.akg.com/site/products/powerslave,id,1129,pid,1129,nodeid,2,_language,EN,view,diagram.html

 

XLS:

 

http://www.akg.com/site/products/powerslave,id,1128,pid,1128,nodeid,2,_language,EN,view,diagram.html

 

Based on that, I'm not sure I'd want the XL II for my overheads, but that's just my preferences. Personally, I normally don't want something that's too terribly bright and hyped in the highs for my drum overheads... but if you are dealing with drummers who go much easier on the brass than some of the ones around here and you tend to have a dark sounding room and / or cymbals & kit, the XL II might be the better (brighter) choice. If not, I'd recommend opting for the XLS.

 

The SM57 and Audix i5 are both very good guitar amp mikes, with the Audix having noticeably beefier lows. Yes, a 414 makes an excellent guitar amp mike, and would work well paired with either one of those two microphones. Again, I'd rather have the XLS for amp duties than the brighter XL II, but if you decided you needed the XLII for vocals too, you could certainly also use it with good results on your guitar amps, although you may decide to use a bit of EQ - or not. It always depends on the amp, the guitar, the room, the musical part and musical context... what works great for one guitar part may be less suitable for the next one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
BAXANDALL Newbie

BAXANDALL

Posted
  • Members
Posted
We now have three different stereo microphone techniques on the table and under discussion: Blumlein stereo, Mid-Side stereo and X/Y stereo. They're not the same - each is different from the others.


Blumlein stereo is a coincident pair of figure-8 microphones that are placed 90 degrees off-axis from each other, with each mic 45 degrees off-center from the center of the sound source(s) you're recording.


Fig1.JPG

http://www.harmonycentral.com/docs/DOC-1721


Mid-Side, it its traditional form, uses a bi-directional mic for the "side" information along with a center microphone - usually a cardioid, but some modern variations use omnis and occasionally even another figure-8 / bi-directional microphone. The center or "mid" mic is pointed directly at the sound source, while the second or "side" mic is positioned so it's aimed 90 degrees off-axis from the source. In the picture below, the top mic (ELUX 251) is set to figure-8 and is pointed to the sides, while the bottom mic (E250) is cardioid and pointed directly at the camera / "sound source:"


Fig.1.jpg

http://www.harmonycentral.com/docs/DOC-1722


Yes, Alan Dower Blumlein invented both of these techniques, and is generally considered to be the father and inventor of modern stereo audio recording and reproduction.


I haven't posted an article on XY stereo yet, but it's basically a coincident (capsules as close together as physically possible) pair of cardioid microphones placed with the bodies of the microphones at a 90 degree angle to each other. Some other stereo techniques use similar coincident and near-coincident placements with angles up to 135 degrees or so. For example ORTF uses a 110 degree angle with near-coincident diaphragms placed 17cm apart.




Cool - those are the ones I reviewed. I was quite impressed actually. The ones with the Cinemag and Lundahl transformers are said to sound a bit more open and extended in their overall frequency response - especially in the highs. I could see that being useful for use as room mikes and drum overheads, but you probably won't miss the extra reach at all if you're mainly using them to mic up guitar amps or Leslie speakers from a keyboard rig - both of which are tasks the standard Fathead II's excel at.



Yay! I'm going to screw around with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
jimash Newbie

jimash

Posted
  • Members
Posted

My favorite guitar mic is the Sennheiser e609.

I have some decent dynamic mics. Sennhieser 421, 431 ( favored by Mel Torme )

AKG D88 ( 80's).

I remember when the Ndyms and Betas came out . Didn't like them.

Some cheapo condensers. Favorite is the M-Audio Nova. Second place Oktava Mk319.

 

Oh yeah why.

The Ndyms and Betas seem too strident in the mids.

I like an SM58 but the AKG kills it for High end and cut.

The e609 has a wonderful transparent sound and doesn't have that sharp boost that you have to cut in an SM 57, so you can play around with the mids more in the 5k region.

The M-Audio mic just sounds good .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...