ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on May 5, 2017 21:36:48 GMT -6
Sharing this post with to Multiple Grammy winning vocalists as I finish short session " No we hire you because you have the ability to select Stuff that doesn't need tweaking" when you work with talented Vocalist on the level of These or JK , Cowboy or Vincent the mics job isn't to take processing nicely it is to do no harm ! In my years of selling mics the guys with the platinum albums and awards never said " I want a mic that takes EQ well" no they wanted "A mic that captures what's going on so I don't need to fuck with it" ! I used to make a ton fixing projects where guys thought a mic took this or that well, I would rent them a mic that captured what they wanted and remove most of their prosseing ! I think picking the "right" mic - one that fits with the singer's voice is a given. But I totally get Stam when he says there's a big difference in how mics take EQ. Some mics have better quality midrange than others and I think that is directly attributed to the quality of the sputtering, the depth and continuity of the backplates, the holes drilled, etc. have you ever gotten into that never ending cycle of trying to EQ a vocal? Pull this out and it gets harsh over here and so on and so on. Mics that take EQ well seem to have quality tones evenly distributed through the frequency range. I also agree that I've never seen a session where a back didn't need some semblance of EQ to make it fit with the rest of the mix. The mic that is going to take EQ best is always going to be the mic that needs the least! Also in a shootout / Demo situation you know "how a mic will take EQ/ dynamics " is going to be a fluid situation, add in the fact the choice of electronics is going to be fluid so what limits do you set? How far do you allow the engineer to process in a demo / shootout? When then is it the mic your demoing ? Where is it the interaction between mic ? EQ? Dynamics? If I fall in love with a Brauner that works like butter through a Retro Double Wide am I going to be disipointed with that choice through Stams LA2 ? I get that yes we do play with the signal, but in order to judge what is doing what we want that signal as pure as we can get, testing and comparisons are all about references and control, elimination of variables. If the demo is of a Prossesed signal are you showing what the mic can do or the engineer? A product demo is the one place where you want it bare ass naked your buying the mic not the guy demoing it for you ! If it's not the case and he's getting the sound you crave you should just be paying him!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 5, 2017 21:45:44 GMT -6
I get what you're saying Eric, and agree only partially. In my post just before this I mentioned, I found I had some completely flat files of 4 of 6 shootout mics solo and compared them to the same files with only two differences, a pinch of reverb, (nothing else at all, no compression, no Eq, no other effects), and an acoustic guitar accompaniment.
The difference between the two was strangely enormous. With only a little reverb and one acoustic guitar I could really hear the unique quality of each mic, without anything else, it sounds really weird and they all sound quite lousy that way. You really couldn't say with confidence any of the mics sounded good, and I'm talking about a mint vintage U47, M49 and C12.
It's like Bob said, once you track with a mic that you prefer flat, a U87 or U67 can come along and knock it right out.
|
|
|
Post by aremos on May 5, 2017 22:20:05 GMT -6
Seems like a lot of folks like the sound of the Chandler over all others. What I expect you are hearing is the negative feedback used in the Redd 47 preamp used in the microphone. The Redd 47 preamp had 24db to 52db of negative feedback in 6db steps. ___________________ ___________________ According to Lynn Fuston (& Adam F), the internal preamp was "bypassed" on the Redd Mic ... & ALL mics used the same pre. Now I technically don't know if it's still using the circuit within EVEN when "bypassed" & going to another pre (w/o mixing both that is).
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on May 6, 2017 6:15:47 GMT -6
Seems like a lot of folks like the sound of the Chandler over all others. What I expect you are hearing is the negative feedback used in the Redd 47 preamp used in the microphone. The Redd 47 preamp had 24db to 52db of negative feedback in 6db steps. I built one up one day with a Neve 1073 input transformer and it did make everything you put into the preamp sound really punchy, full and smooth. I still have the prototype here but its on the back burner at the moment. There are some advantage to negative feedback in audio amplifier circuits. 1) Negative feedback can increase the stability in high gain situations. 2) Using negative feedback can reduce noise in thre amplifier chain 3) Negative feedback can decrease non-linear distortion is multi-amplifier stages. 4) The bandwidth of an amplifier can be increased with negative feedback. 5) An amplifier with negative feedback will have an increase in its input impedance. This is helpful when you are coupling a condenser capsule into a microphone circuit. If for arguement sake we say an LDC condenser element has a capacitance of 70pf then it will have a reactance of 22 meg ohms at 100hz and a reactance of 113K ohms at 20khz. This capsule would have a reactance of 52Meg ohms at 40hz and you would need to load it with 520 meg to have a flat response down at that frequency. 6) Negative feedback also reduces the output impedance of the circuit so a lower ratio output transformer can be used. The REDD 47 had an output transformer with a 7:1 ratio. So, I suggest that is what we are hearing in the Chandler microphone, which to my old ears sounds like the Chandler is smoothing out the transients a bit. Negative feedback will reduce gain so usually two gain stages are required. We use negative feedback in our MT8016 solid state preamp which has two 30db negative feedback gain stages that are coupled in tandem. The gain of each stage is brought up together and like the Redd 47 microphones just seem to sound better through the MT8016. Cheers, Dave I'm pretty sure they used the Millennia and not the built in pre. Are you saying it's in the path? I'm pretty sure the REDD preamp cannot be bypassed. So, this means that the REDD mic was, in effect, going through 2 preamp stages.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 6, 2017 7:52:05 GMT -6
In a demo video of Chandler's I saw somewhere, they mentioned you can use it with other preamps just dial it down. They didn't say if that is actually a true bypass, I'd guess it is.
|
|
|
Post by spock on May 6, 2017 8:31:32 GMT -6
In a demo video of Chandler's I saw somewhere, they mentioned you can use it with other preamps just dial it down. They didn't say if that is actually a true bypass, I'd guess it is. There is no bypass, only turning it down to +4. They had to make it conform to the rest of the shootout by going through the same external preamp setup as the others.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 6, 2017 8:55:51 GMT -6
Thanks Spock. That makes me wonder if it's even better with it's own preamp.
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on May 6, 2017 8:56:08 GMT -6
you're always better off trying the mic in your studio anyway...
|
|
|
Post by spock on May 6, 2017 8:59:33 GMT -6
Thanks Spock. That makes me wonder if it's even better with it's own preamp. You've heard it unencumbered on that mono male vcl/ac gtr track.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 6, 2017 10:37:13 GMT -6
Thanks Spock.
I'd sure like to compare the new Telefunken U47, the Chandler and a vintage U67 with my voice. One of those would be my holy grail. So far, the vintage U67 topped a vintage U47 when I did my shootout.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 6, 2017 11:11:21 GMT -6
Love that technically this mic shootout is flawed ππ« but plastered all over GS and the interwebs .... The Chandler mic is a serious contender. I would much rather have a pair of Chandler Redd Mics or a Chandler and a Upton / MicRehab251 than a cloned reissue telefunken 47 for $10,000 anyday of the week that ends in Y... ππ waiting on more info from users like roundbadge ( or any other members who have used this mic ) but seeing as he is testing Barefoot mm26 he is probably busy π Chandler Redd Mic users shouteth your professed love for this coveted piece of musical wizardry π
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on May 6, 2017 11:17:46 GMT -6
Back when the people in front of the mikes were getting paid by the hour, it was all about speed. We could throw up a 67 or 87 and hit record trusting that it would sound great in the mix. Believe me, everybody wanted a cheaper replacement but never really found one that worked on almost all singers.
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 6, 2017 11:25:07 GMT -6
No one sounds terrible on a Neumann.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 6, 2017 11:41:09 GMT -6
No one sounds terrible on a Neumann.Β Unless they sound terrible period π
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 6, 2017 13:20:43 GMT -6
The 87 Ai has a transformer, right?
|
|
|
Post by m03 on May 6, 2017 13:42:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 6, 2017 14:29:21 GMT -6
I love how similar the insides of that mic look to some off the shelf Chinese manufactured mics today. Just goes to show you the devil is in the details.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on May 6, 2017 21:13:05 GMT -6
Yes, all 87s have transformers. Like 84s the 87i uses the 48 volt power for polarizing the diaphragm so you want to use a supply that won't sag with more than one mike on it.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on May 7, 2017 6:39:00 GMT -6
Although Neumann also made the U77 which was a 'T' powered (12 volt) transformerless FET LDC that used a K67 capsule and was externally physically the same as the early U87's. A very detailed mic that manages to avoid much of the stridency of some of the later transformerless Neumann's.
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on May 7, 2017 19:49:08 GMT -6
The 87ai's need a 1073 Neve Channel for me to like them.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on May 7, 2017 20:27:40 GMT -6
Sounds like a modified 87 and not a stock one.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 8, 2017 8:00:47 GMT -6
Since we are discussing the U87 vs U87ai a bit, here is a good shoot out between them. They discuss the differences, etc. Personally. I think the U87 out shines the U87ai on everything except voice over work.
|
|
|
Post by roundbadge on May 8, 2017 9:45:40 GMT -6
The sweetwater Chandler clip is 2 pre amp stages. That was s mistake imo. That doesn't showcase the true nature of the mic.
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on May 8, 2017 9:56:45 GMT -6
No one sounds terrible on a Neumann. If you listen hard enough you can find problems with Neumann Mics just like any other mics. Some of them sound Hard and Jarring on certain sounds.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on May 8, 2017 10:49:25 GMT -6
The sweetwater Chandler clip is 2 pre amp stages. That was s mistake imo. That doesn't showcase the true nature of the mic. Yeah for showcasing what the mic is all about your probably right, but if your doing something like this you gotta have rules! Besides, I'll bet there are couple sitting on the shelf in Fort Wayne so they had to put it the big shootout!
|
|