|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 30, 2016 16:22:25 GMT -6
87 is on the guitar.. in fig 8 ... 8) but I hear ya... interesting on the tube preamp... don't have a tube preamp... I keep waiting for a 'funk-en to fall from the sky 8) Actually one of the better results I got was using the single U87 recently when I was doing a test on the Stam SA2A.. I just placed the U87 carefully and used it to capture the voice and guitar at the same time... worked really really well.. cheers Wiz That's real nice, man! Bricasti in the mix here? Thanks! yeah, Bricasti 8) cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Aug 30, 2016 16:38:06 GMT -6
Thanks Anton, The proximity might kill it for me. Just another reason to kick myself for ever selling my RE20. >>if your not directly in front of it it will ignore you I'm a Dad, so I do know that feeling  Ok, so not be argumentative, but I don't think it has a proximity effect much at all. Like all dynamics, it sounds as intended in close micing scenarios. It literally CAN'T have a huge proximity effect because it's designed to be used in close proximity. It would just be shitty if that were the case. If it put a huge proximity bump but didn't pick up unless you're right up on it? Ha. But, it also won't sound ANYTHING like an re20....any more than a U87 sounds like a 414. It's the same yin/yang of top end dynamic mics. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Aug 30, 2016 16:43:43 GMT -6
Well, your 87 in Fig8 will be the better choice for the person playing and singing at once....by the nature of the pickup pattern.....but, the sm7 will do fine. Just syaing--two Fig8 mics--positioned to get the nulls pointed at the guitar and vocalist's mouth.....will tend to get the most isolated--other than if you've got a hyperC to use for the guitar than you can point "down to" the guitar....the issue is rarely getting too much acoustic in the vocal mic--it's the opposite, no? It's having so much vocal in the acoustic....HyperC pointed DOWN at the 12th fret'ish..... I will point out again that if you have a tube mic preamp....even a cheap TOOB one....the Sm7 loves them, IMO/E. I feel like I could leave it plugged into the LA610 full time. But, I've used them through ART TubeMPs and variations (ProMPA.....DPS DIO etc)....Groove Tubes BRick....there's something that just....it's a nice marriage-sm7+tube preamp. 87 is on the guitar.. in fig 8 ... 8) but I hear ya... interesting on the tube preamp... don't have a tube preamp... I keep waiting for a 'funk-en to fall from the sky 8) Actually one of the better results I got was using the single U87 recently when I was doing a test on the Stam SA2A.. I just placed the U87 carefully and used it to capture the voice and guitar at the same time... worked really really well.. cheers Wiz That sounds great Wiz. Where did you place the 87? Amazing balance. |
|
|
|
Post by chasmanian on Aug 30, 2016 16:54:56 GMT -6
"Ok, so not be argumentative, but I don't think it has a proximity effect much at all. Like all dynamics, it sounds as intended in close micing scenarios. It literally CAN'T have a huge proximity effect because it's designed to be used in close proximity. It would just be shitty if that were the case. If it put a huge proximity bump but didn't pick up unless you're right up on it? Ha.
But, it also won't sound ANYTHING like an re20....any more than a U87 sounds like a 414. It's the same yin/yang of top end dynamic mics."
hey popmann,
I am fascinated by your comment.
I have always wanted to try one of these mics (I never have).
what attracts me, is having read that James Ingram recorded "Just Once" on one.
that is one of my favorite songs, (and btw, a song that really inspired me to play keys).
as for Ingram's vocal on that song, I guess I just always assumed that there was some proximity effect going on there.
thank you for your post and clarifying that for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 30, 2016 16:54:57 GMT -6
87 is on the guitar.. in fig 8 ... 8) but I hear ya... interesting on the tube preamp... don't have a tube preamp... I keep waiting for a 'funk-en to fall from the sky 8) Actually one of the better results I got was using the single U87 recently when I was doing a test on the Stam SA2A.. I just placed the U87 carefully and used it to capture the voice and guitar at the same time... worked really really well.. cheers Wiz That sounds great Wiz. Where did you place the 87? Amazing balance. Yeah, it worked out really great! funny, even the performance was cool.. stuff you do when you aren't over thinking it.. 8) It was about 2 ft away, I was sitting on a chair, highish, and the u87 was somewhere around just above guitar neck height in the playing position, I just shuffled back and forth and moved the mic up and down a bit, then hit record... wish it was always that easy. 8) cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Aug 30, 2016 23:29:04 GMT -6
Yeah most of us qualify as "old" on this board. So we all can point to amazing artists all throughout the 70s up to today that have released amazing albums cut with an Sm7 or Re20 - Stevie Wonder, Chicago, James Ingram, Incubus, Ray LaMontagne, Michael Jackson. But much like a Chris Stapleton today, those artists who are truly masters of their voice and at a level above others can sound world class on most mics because they are so in control of their voices, to the point where they can compensate for the different eq curves of the mics they are using. They have next level self listening skills and vocal control.
I love gear, but as I've said before you can have the absolute greatest impact on a vocal by "affecting it at it's source". Switching from an SM7 to a vintage U47 will have less impact on the recorded sound of a person's voice than technique. You are better off asking a singer to adjust his/her technique and sound. And while everyone can drive a car, I'm not interested in watching average folks race. Average singers don't need to worry about racing slicks, it's inconsequential when you're driving around your neighborhood.
|
|
|
|
Post by chasmanian on Aug 31, 2016 4:23:25 GMT -6
awesome post yotonic.
btw the influence that Stevie Wonder has had on me is infinitely large.
fascinated to hear that he used an SM7.
with regards to age and old........I like the idea that age is mind over matter.....if you don't mind, it doesn't matter.
everyday's a gift. like its own mini life time.
my boss almost died last week.
sudden big heart attack. 5 hours of emergency heart surgery. blah blah blah. he's a couple years older than me. but just a couple. he said it was a wake up call.
he said his new response to everything is "I don't care".
yeah man, got to find a way to keep the stress at bay. I say. lol
anyways, I'm exactly the age that George Harrison died at.
I remember when he died, I was 44.
a 58 year old dude, well.....he wasn't old......but he wasn't THAT young........hmph.........now I'm 58.
I see 58 from the direct experience of being 58.
man it went fast. still is.
ah, where was I?
oop, gotta go.
I think I gotta chase some kids off my lawn. hahhahahahhaha
|
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Aug 31, 2016 5:48:21 GMT -6
I was pretty sure Steve used an RE20?
I've just always thought, for what the SM7 is, the cost is ridiculously high. I'd get a Beyer M130 or M160 for that!
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Aug 31, 2016 6:37:34 GMT -6
The SM7b has a very pronounced proximity effect. The rejection is killer on it, if your not directly in front of it it will ignore you... That's one of the reason's I was hoping it would be a good fit for me. My room is pretty well-treated because it doesn't sound great. That and I have a few noise sources that can come into play, like a HD etc. The off-axis rejection would have been a plus for me. It's like a vocal booth in a mic!;-) |
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Aug 31, 2016 16:30:23 GMT -6
Forgot to add, popmann what's your experience with the Art MPA (ii)? Hoping to pick one up soon for my ribbon mics for drum OH's. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,940 
|
Post by ericn on Aug 31, 2016 19:27:25 GMT -6
"Ok, so not be argumentative, but I don't think it has a proximity effect much at all. Like all dynamics, it sounds as intended in close micing scenarios. It literally CAN'T have a huge proximity effect because it's designed to be used in close proximity. It would just be shitty if that were the case. If it put a huge proximity bump but didn't pick up unless you're right up on it? Ha. But, it also won't sound ANYTHING like an re20....any more than a U87 sounds like a 414. It's the same yin/yang of top end dynamic mics." hey popmann, I am fascinated by your comment. I have always wanted to try one of these mics (I never have). what attracts me, is having read that James Ingram recorded "Just Once" on one. that is one of my favorite songs, (and btw, a song that really inspired me to play keys). as for Ingram's vocal on that song, I guess I just always assumed that there was some proximity effect going on there. thank you for your post and clarifying that for me. Ask any old radio guy why they love / hate the Sm7 and the first thing you hear is that big old bass boost! That's proximity effect! Close mic a speaker with an SM7 run some pink noise and use an RTA app, now do the same with a 635a compare the results ! It's a proximity effect that works, which is the hallmark of Shure dynamics. |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Aug 31, 2016 22:51:12 GMT -6
Forgot to add, popmann what's your experience with the Art MPA (ii)? Hoping to pick one up soon for my ribbon mics for drum OH's. Really, just mixed a number of albums cut (all but the drums) with MPAs and ProChannels (same preamp I think)....no experience with the more recent ones. I've had a DPS DIO around here for a while--lovely converters, decent preamps. But, then--I don't hold the typical BBS 70s transformer fare in really high regard--more often preferring a modern fast preamp--which is really what most of the ART stuff is--fast modern preamps with a toob output stage. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Sept 1, 2016 7:36:55 GMT -6
Just because YOU can't hear the difference between an SM7 and a U87, doesn't mean there isn't a difference. It just means YOU can't hear it.
An SM7/a/b captures about 75% of the sound from 50 cycles up to ~12K. There's a bunch of stuff between 12K and 20K that's important. There is also the way a higher quality microphone responds to sound, how it orders harmonics and even picks some stuff up that a dynamic won't. That is just some of the difference.
The one thing... the ONE THING... an SM7 can do is track a guide vocal well enough to be used for everything right up to cutting final vocals, because it sounds reasonably OK and it has a pickup pattern about the size and shape of a tennis ball directly in front of that ghastly foam wind screen. It does that so well that I keep mine, and it only does that one thing, but, it is the only mic that gets used on that one thing.
It is not like an RE20 or RE27, by the way. The RE 20/27 is more like a 441. Sonic oceans apart.
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Sept 1, 2016 7:48:36 GMT -6
Yeah, the SM7 can sound really great. It takes eq much like a ribbon mic. It also has a very focused sound. More focused then a U87 or a different LDC. The SM7 doesn't have the reach, or polar pattern size to include all the fun stuff that we love about great LDC's. But that is also part of the reason people love the sound of it in a mix. It is very good for rock vocals, dynamic female vocals and for vocals that you want to be in your face and intimate.
I grabbed mine recently for 200 bucks. It was a perfect purchase!
|
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Sept 1, 2016 8:11:04 GMT -6
If you want to hear how good an SM7 vocal can sound, listen to the Breeders' Title TK.
Mic has a nice directness. Works for live or gritty vocals sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Sept 1, 2016 13:30:30 GMT -6
I think it's really good at taming strident, high SPL sources. One guy had this Super Reverb with the treble absolutely blasting. After begging him to turn it down, I just put up the SM7B on a hunch, and it tracked just perfectly.
On screaming vocals it's a similar story.
It's good for sung vocals, but to my ear where it really shines on voice is the spoken word. Just has a big smooth sound in that application.
I prefer handheld mics for the "quick and dirty" vocal throw down, so I sold my SM7B and now I use an SM57 with a TAB Funkenwerk T58 transformer for this purpose. That is a really great sort of under the radar mic mod that puts it in a wonderful place for singing. The M88TG works pretty well too. Another on my radar is the Heil PR35 but I haven't tried one yet.
I would agree that the M88TG, MD441, and RE20 all sound completely different in a way. Even though they have some overlap in purposes.
I got bored with all of them for some reason, but hung onto the M88TG for bass amps and drums, general dynamic duties.
|
|
|
|
Post by iamasound on Sept 5, 2016 7:30:40 GMT -6
For all that my RE-20 knows, I could be tracking my vocals in Abby Road Studios and not in my horrid little room.Ignorance is oft times bliss.
|
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on Sept 15, 2016 7:42:16 GMT -6
Just did some vocals with the regular foam and the sock foam(a7ws). Both are very usable but the sock makes it a little rounder and fuller, not as clear. It's also slower. All that makes the A7ws a little more awkward to work with on a vocal.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Sept 15, 2016 12:19:25 GMT -6
Have used it to record a few vocals, I never have mixed those sessions though.I may go back and revise some of those vox and see how I would shape them for a mix, I bet I would learn more about the mic. For males with boomy deep voices I think it's great and I never touched the eq section.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 15, 2016 14:53:41 GMT -6
Thanks Anton, The proximity might kill it for me. Just another reason to kick myself for ever selling my RE20. >>if your not directly in front of it it will ignore you I'm a Dad, so I do know that feeling Ok, so not be argumentative, but I don't think it has a proximity effect much at all. Like all dynamics, it sounds as intended in close micing scenarios. It literally CAN'T have a huge proximity effect because it's designed to be used in close proximity. It would just be shitty if that were the case. If it put a huge proximity bump but didn't pick up unless you're right up on it? Ha. But, it also won't sound ANYTHING like an re20....any more than a U87 sounds like a 414. It's the same yin/yang of top end dynamic mics. Of course it has proximity effect - it's a dynamic cardioid and the only way a dynamic cardioid to not have proximity effect is for it to employ the Electro-Voice Variable - D technology, which it does not. It's a Shure Unidyne design, essentially a modified 57. Erm.... It's called "proximity effect" because it happens when the source is in close proximity to the microphone. That's what "proximity" means. It only does it when you're close to the microphone. I'm guessing that you're not noticing the proximity effect as such because the mic is designed for close micing voice and the proximity effect is compensated for in the acoustic design of the mic - which would result in an attenuation of perceived low end response on sources that are father away from the mic. That doesn't mean that the proximity bump isn't there, the mic is just "pre-equalized" for it in the intended application. Remember, it's a radio broadcast mic, designed for close talking. The filter switches on it might be a clue. Or it could be that you're simply used to the sound of proximity effect. When I was much younger and extremely inexperienced I did not much care for the sound of Electro-Voice cardioids because of their lack of proximity effect. The didn't hype my voice up close - to me they sounded flat and dry. I could never figure out why they greatly outnumbered Shures on TV network music and variety shows. It took me awhile to gain the experience to figure it out. And saying that "all dynamics sound as intended in close micing situations" simply isn't true. BTW, the RE-20 IS a Variable -D microphone (As are the RE-10, RE-11, RE-15, and RE-16 as well as some older designs like the 664 and 666), and as such has minimal, if any proximity effect. The only non- Variable-D dynamic mics that lack proximity effect are omnis. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Sept 15, 2016 19:01:17 GMT -6
Well, your 87 in Fig8 will be the better choice for the person playing and singing at once....by the nature of the pickup pattern.....but, the sm7 will do fine. Just syaing--two Fig8 mics--positioned to get the nulls pointed at the guitar and vocalist's mouth.....will tend to get the most isolated--other than if you've got a hyperC to use for the guitar than you can point "down to" the guitar....the issue is rarely getting too much acoustic in the vocal mic--it's the opposite, no? It's having so much vocal in the acoustic....HyperC pointed DOWN at the 12th fret'ish..... I will point out again that if you have a tube mic preamp....even a cheap TOOB one....the Sm7 loves them, IMO/E. I feel like I could leave it plugged into the LA610 full time. But, I've used them through ART TubeMPs and variations (ProMPA.....DPS DIO etc)....Groove Tubes BRick....there's something that just....it's a nice marriage-sm7+tube preamp. 87 is on the guitar.. in fig 8 ... 8) but I hear ya... interesting on the tube preamp... don't have a tube preamp... I keep waiting for a 'funk-en to fall from the sky 8) Actually one of the better results I got was using the single U87 recently when I was doing a test on the Stam SA2A.. I just placed the U87 carefully and used it to capture the voice and guitar at the same time... worked really really well.. cheers Wiz This is killer brother. Anyone who thinks software can do what that comp did, I'll take to task. That clip should sell some hardware! But the performance was spot on as always. Nice work, Wiz. |
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Sept 15, 2016 19:06:52 GMT -6
Ok, so not be argumentative, but I don't think it has a proximity effect much at all. Like all dynamics, it sounds as intended in close micing scenarios. It literally CAN'T have a huge proximity effect because it's designed to be used in close proximity. It would just be shitty if that were the case. If it put a huge proximity bump but didn't pick up unless you're right up on it? Ha. But, it also won't sound ANYTHING like an re20....any more than a U87 sounds like a 414. It's the same yin/yang of top end dynamic mics. Of course it has proximity effect - it's a dynamic cardioid and the only way a dynamic cardioid to not have proximity effect is for it to employ the Electro-Voice Variable - D technology, which it does not. It's a Shure Unidyne design, essentially a modified 57. Erm.... It's called "proximity effect" because it happens when the source is in close proximity to the microphone. That's what "proximity" means. It only does it when you're close to the microphone. I'm guessing that you're not noticing the proximity effect as such because the mic is designed for close micing voice and the proximity effect is compensated for in the acoustic design of the mic - which would result in an attenuation of perceived low end response on sources that are father away from the mic. That doesn't mean that the proximity bump isn't there, the mic is just "pre-equalized" for it in the intended application. Remember, it's a radio broadcast mic, designed for close talking. The filter switches on it might be a clue. Or it could be that you're simply used to the sound of proximity effect. When I was much younger and extremely inexperienced I did not much care for the sound of Electro-Voice cardioids because of their lack of proximity effect. The didn't hype my voice up close - to me they sounded flat and dry. I could never figure out why they greatly outnumbered Shures on TV network music and variety shows. It took me awhile to gain the experience to figure it out. And saying that "all dynamics sound as intended in close micing situations" simply isn't true. BTW, the RE-20 IS a Variable -D microphone (As are the RE-10, RE-11, RE-15, and RE-16 as well as some older designs like the 664 and 666), and as such has minimal, if any proximity effect. The only non- Variable-D dynamic mics that lack proximity effect are omnis. Yeah, and M88 and MD441 have way more detail up close than SM7. Almost condenser-like. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Sept 15, 2016 19:06:56 GMT -6
And that James Ingram clip makes me wanna slit my wrists..
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Sept 15, 2016 20:17:49 GMT -6
87 is on the guitar.. in fig 8 ... 8) but I hear ya... interesting on the tube preamp... don't have a tube preamp... I keep waiting for a 'funk-en to fall from the sky 8) Actually one of the better results I got was using the single U87 recently when I was doing a test on the Stam SA2A.. I just placed the U87 carefully and used it to capture the voice and guitar at the same time... worked really really well.. cheers Wiz This is killer brother. Anyone who thinks software can do what that comp did, I'll take to task. That clip should sell some hardware! But the performance was spot on as always. Nice work, Wiz. Hey cowboycoalminer funny you say that, someone wrote to me somewhere, mail or audio board somewhere, saying that the clip lead them to pull the trigger on the SA2A.... which was cool to hear, thanks for checking it out cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Sept 15, 2016 20:49:00 GMT -6
This is killer brother. Anyone who thinks software can do what that comp did, I'll take to task. That clip should sell some hardware! But the performance was spot on as always. Nice work, Wiz. Hey cowboycoalminer funny you say that, someone wrote to me somewhere, mail or audio board somewhere, saying that the clip lead them to pull the trigger on the SA2A.... which was cool to hear, thanks for checking it out cheers Wiz You mean this...  |
|
