Members mparsons Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 At a show we put on, the best sounding mic for vocals was not my Shure SM58.. but it was another band's mic. I didn't get the name of the mic or even the manufacturer until today, and this is what sounded so good, crisp and clear: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/Digital-Reference-DRVX1-Dynamic-Cardioid-Vocal-Mic?sku=270430 Is that a freak incident? That mic sounded FANTASTIC, very high gain before feedback, very clear, just a great sound. For less than a SM58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 My guess is that the system was eq'd for that mic and the eq was pretty drastic meaning that when you used a "normal" quality mic you had inappropriate correction which caused problems with the SM-58. I can pretty much guarantee that I could make the SM-58 sound better than even the best sound the other mic could produce. Just the nature of the beast... comparisons that are unequal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members congaron Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 In our band, the samson r21 wipes the 58 all over the stage. Our lead singer still prefers his 58, but it really doesn't sound as good. The system is not eq'd for either of them really. Just each mic channel rolled off in the lows a little...more for the 58. The mind can play tricks once you've dropped $100. God bless! -Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Majoria Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 I did some events about 5 years ago and had people coming up afterwards (including the singer who didn't have time to check it out during the event) and ask what mic I had on the singer since it was great. It was a Samson S11. Used the same mic this past Sunday for an outdoor fundraising event and had several complements on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by Majoria I did some events about 5 years ago and had people coming up afterwards (including the singer who didn't have time to check it out during the event) and ask what mic I had on the singer since it was great. It was a Samson S11. Used the same mic this past Sunday for an outdoor fundraising event and had several complements on it. dunno if it's similar but I use samson R11 mics and they do sound very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members milesdf Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 are you sure thats the mic? I can think of 5 mics off the top of my head that look very similar to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 Actually, your mind can play tricks when youspend only $40-50. In real side by side application, the difference is pretty noticeable... the 58 is a better, more consistent, more reliable product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mparsons Posted October 17, 2006 Author Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 There wasn't any EQ on the system, just a slight cut around 2.5KHz to get rid of some hiss. The channel EQ were just a slight treble boost and a slight bass cut. I was running the sound board for most of the bands except my own and it was my PA system. I know that that's the mic because the band that had it told me so. I didn't know how much it was or anything, just that with flat settings the Shure sounded muffled with it. What are some tips to make the Shure sound better? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 The 58 shouldn't sound muffled unless it's damaged or there's a bunch of crud plugging up the foam windscreen behind the mesh. It's not beat to hell or stinky-dirty is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Unalaska Posted October 17, 2006 Members Share Posted October 17, 2006 I bought a DRVX1 (don't ask, ex-employee discount) and it was the worst piece of garbage ever. I ended up selling with some other bad mics that don't deserve metion. For an even worse mic check out the "instrument" version. ugp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mparsons Posted October 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Nope, its relatively new ( only about a year old ) and its been treated pretty nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 18, 2006 Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Then my guess is that something eles is wrong. I would test the entire system's freq response with an analyzer to be sure a deficiency in the system isn't being "corrected" by another deficiency in the mic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mparsons Posted October 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 hmm, will do. where could I get an analyzer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flanc Posted October 18, 2006 Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Originally posted by mparsons hmm, will do. where could I get an analyzer? If you have a laptop with a mic input (and a measurement mic), you could use this A&H RTA software. http://www.allen-heath.com/US/ViewProductdownloads.asp?search=Real%20Time%20Analyser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members glepko Posted October 18, 2006 Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Originally posted by flanc If you have a laptop with a mic input (and a measurement mic), you could use this A&H RTA software.http://www.allen-heath.com/US/ViewProductdownloads.asp?search=Real%20Time%20Analyser That's interesting. I sent you some questions on PM if you have time to answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flanc Posted October 18, 2006 Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Your mailbox (PM) was full. Lot's of company's including DBX, Rode and others make measurement/calibration mics. Behringer makes a cheapo model that works for ok.http://www.zzounds.com/item--BEHECM8000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flanc Posted October 18, 2006 Members Share Posted October 18, 2006 Perhaps I could give a few more details. You want to play pink noise through your system with the channel eq flat. Here is a source to download a 20 minute audio file of pink noise (plus some other cool audio stuff...courtesy of Bink Knowles) http://binkster.net/extras.shtml Then, with your laptop running the RTA software and connected to a measurement mic, you'll see how flat your system is or is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bazza54 Posted October 19, 2006 Members Share Posted October 19, 2006 OK big assumption. You weren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 19, 2006 Members Share Posted October 19, 2006 Originally posted by bazza54 If there is something wrong with your system I would completely ignore any advice here. Why would you want to make any changes to a system that you:(a) thought there was nothing wrong with originally(b) think sounds great with a cheap mic Just sell the 58s and buy a bunch of the cheap mics. Now this makes so much sense:eek: Maybe a real improvement would be a good thing... like walking around with a really crappy haircut that makes you look like a dork but you don't know it. Wouldn't you want to re-evaluate what you look like if not aware at least as a reality check??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bazza54 Posted October 20, 2006 Members Share Posted October 20, 2006 So just because some guy (the OP in this instance) prefers the sound of a cheaper mic over the venerable SM58 everyone throws their arms up and proclaims that there must be something wrong somewhere else in the system. Maybe the dude just preferred the cheaper mic. From his first post it appears that he was more surprised that a cheaper mic could sound better than a 58 rather than he thought there was anything wrong with the 58 in the first place. This is not sacrilegious. The 58 has rightly gained its reputation for being rugged as much as anything. Perhaps a drop test might show why one is more expensive and highly regarded than the other. Consider some of the top brand PA systems (Meyer, JBL, Nexo, Martin etc) and talk to people that use them. The general consensus is that they all have different tonal characteristics or that they can be sweetened with some fine fettling. Yet these systems are designed by top engineers, with state of the art measuring systems. If you talk to the designers they all have pretty much the same design objective (most acurate sound within budget constraint and market placement). Yet the different system still all manage to sound different. Which is best? Whichever one you think is; best is subjective, the same way that it is subjective which microphone you think sounds best. If the OP wants to investigate further forget the test gear and spectrum analysers. Buy one of the cheap mics and do some actual comparisons. Run two mics into adjacent channels on the mixer and alternate between them. Listening to just the voice on its own, in a more controlled set up should highlight the differences. Try it for a number of gigs so you get used to the sound and then go back to the 58. Dull and muffled might change to warm, rich and full bodied. There are lots of reasons why the two mics sounded different. Different singers, differing styles and tonal ranges of the bands or simply that the dude was standing in different positions when he listened to the different mics used. If you eliminate these differences and still prefer the cheap microphone then using that instead of the 58 to get the sound that you want is just as valid a solution as altering the eq or spending great amounts of money upgrading your PA to get the 58 to sound the way you want it. What doesn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 20, 2006 Members Share Posted October 20, 2006 You miss my point... do you know the story of the Emperor who wears no clothes because his tailor says this invisible fine gold cloth is the best in the land, the emperor truely believed this and everybody in the kingdom agrees otherwise the will be killed. Then one innocent child screams "the emperor has no clothes on, the population all clamor that it's true, the emporer is standing in the street naked faced with reality that his mind believed something that it wanted to believe but was not true? The more experience you have with different equipment, different environments, etc., the easier it will be to differentiate why some equiipment achieves the retutation that it does. This doesn't mean that some equipment is highly over-rated due to advertising and marketing accomplishments, but in general really good equipment earns a reputation. So before automatically agreeing with somebody who thinks a cheap mic sounds better than a known good product, as a scientist I prefer to investigate and verify that the results he experienced are valid in general and not because of something that may be wrong with his system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mparsons Posted October 21, 2006 Author Members Share Posted October 21, 2006 I didn't mean to start a fight I'm sorry! I will try to get ahold of the mic to see if that really was the deal. 'Clear' and 'articulate' is only a hair's breadth away from 'harsh' and 'sterile' anyway. One negative thing about the cheaper mic is that it did pick up a lot of handling noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 21, 2006 Members Share Posted October 21, 2006 That would also translate to feedback from mechanical coupling. Don't worry about picking a fight, there are plenty of people learning from this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members witesol Posted October 21, 2006 Members Share Posted October 21, 2006 I doubt any thing is wrong with his system, perhaps he simply prefers the brighter mic and however the system is set, it seems to be better to this poster's ears. Do we care that someone likes a $70 mic more than a $99 58? I don't. Go buy a bunch of them. People tell me absolutes all the time about what sounds better or worse. You can analyze the system to "perfection" but someone still has to run it and if they want to hear a bright, dull, boomy, boxy, woofy or airy sound that's what will come out eventually. I know that regardless of the mic, I typically start making it sound how I want it. I don't care for Liver and onions..no matter how much someone tries to convince me otherwise I still won't like it. Sound on the other hand is a learned, evolving skill. What I once thought was a decent mix or tone doesn't pass anymore. There are those that will never have the ears to piant a beautiful canvas with sound, will never know the subtlies. That doesn't mean the audio "mathemeticians" can't have a place or a job. The "handling noise" issue is definitely a red flag, but not a deal breaker. I love a Heil PR20 and it has some handling noise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 21, 2006 Members Share Posted October 21, 2006 Knowing what is accurate and what is colored may indeed be important in troubleshootingand solving issues relating to improvements in the future, dealing with difficult acoustic environments, gain before feedback issues (especially with loud monitors) etc. Just because somethings sounds "good" to you doesn't mean that it's not a potential problem, ore worse yet, causing you problems that are being blamed on something else. Being a mathemetician doen not mean that a person can't mix, can't be creative, or can't write excellent music. What it does mean is that they have additional analytical skills to troubleshoot and arrive at a better solution without a lot of false starts. It also means that an electrical engineer with additional education and exposure to music will be more likely to design better products (tools) for you to use to accomplish your work. For example, it's like a musician who is well educated, the process of writing and arranging becomes who much more efficient with the experience and exposure to techniques that you may be unaware of. So, I am aware of a lot of the pitfalls of a lower quality product that may not be a problem to a novice user right now but as he grows with the system (and musical ability) they may indeed become a problem. By using a tool that avoids these pitfalls, the entire frustration process and difficulty can be eliminated. Nothing worse than losing a future gig because of problems at another gig due to feedback issues for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.