|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 14:25:12 GMT -6
I've got two SM7B's, one SM7, and an RE20. The RE20 has more clarity and the SM7/Bs have more body. On vocals I usually prefer the SM7/Bs over the RE20. I've never bothered to shoot out the SM7 vs SM7B. Maybe someday. Tab Funkenwork still sells the upgraded transformer for the 57 and you can buy 57's pre-modded with them from Zen Pro Audio. I've been curious about the Crimson mods but I've never heard them. Until now the only issues I've ever seen or heard of someone having with the off-axis response of a 57 is with hi-hat bleed into a snare mic, but that's not exclusive to SM57's. I think the SE V7X is a little better in terms of high hat bleed when positioned on snare. At least that's what I tell myself. V7X is a great snare mic.
|
|
|
Post by bradd on May 30, 2019 14:35:43 GMT -6
Agreed. The SM7 works great on me, but the brightness of the M88 just sounds off with me. I love it for other things though. Have you considered rolling off the treble just a touch?
I like the low end on the mic, and find the top to be much morte manageable than the Shures, as the response in the presence region is much smoother. The Shures get really ragged in the presence region (and no two are really the same, which can make monitor EQ difficult), which exacerbates problems I have with sibilance on my own voice.
I haven't. About once a year I see a thread like this and go back and revisit the M88TG on my vocals. It sounds so bad on me that I wouldn't think of EQing it over pulling out a mic that I know will work. I've never had a problem with sibilence on any other mic like I do with the M88.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 30, 2019 14:41:11 GMT -6
Talking shit about the SM57 is kind of hilarious to me. It's like talking shit about the Beatles. What, do you think you're going to change someone's mind? At this point, really? True! It's the OKest mic around for recording electric guitar cabinets. That alone makes it a useful tool for all.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 14:47:34 GMT -6
What's weird about the 57/58, is that they sound excellent (for me), on stage, around town. But I haven't self recorded a single vocal, that stands up as well as any other vocal mics in my personal "arsenal". I think the"traveling through the PA.", might be an important factor. Chris P.S. I'm a big fan of premium pre's, on the Shure Unidynes, AND Hermit's Hermits!
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 14:57:26 GMT -6
I've got two SM7B's, one SM7, and an RE20. The RE20 has more clarity and the SM7/Bs have more body. On vocals I usually prefer the SM7/Bs over the RE20. I've never bothered to shoot out the SM7 vs SM7B. Maybe someday. Tab Funkenwork still sells the upgraded transformer for the 57 and you can buy 57's pre-modded with them from Zen Pro Audio. I've been curious about the Crimson mods but I've never heard them. Until now the only issues I've ever seen or heard of someone having with the off-axis response of a 57 is with hi-hat bleed into a snare mic, but that's not exclusive to SM57's. I think the SE V7X is a little better in terms of high hat bleed when positioned on snare. At least that's what I tell myself. V7X is a great snare mic. Hmm, I’ve got an SE V7 (not X) but I’ve never tried it on snare. Maybe I will. I think it’s hypercardioid so makes sense it would be better with bleed. It’s mostly my scratch vocal go-to mic.
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 15:32:32 GMT -6
Here’s an interesting shootout comparing several mics of drastically different price points, including a U87, U89, and SM57. Where’s the tipping point?
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on May 30, 2019 15:37:57 GMT -6
This might be the most GS thread I've read on this board.
He asked about higher value workhorse multi patern mics and you guys are debating merits of rudimentary single patern mics.
I think there are some $700 multi patern options that likely perform as well as $2000 mics. A 414 is going to work great for someone who has a good space and knows how to record with it.
It's really only when you get to vocals that you might hear things from more expensive mics that can elude cheaper things. But you hear all the time of cheap mics winning out for certain sessions.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 16:44:05 GMT -6
I think the SE V7X is a little better in terms of high hat bleed when positioned on snare. At least that's what I tell myself. V7X is a great snare mic. Hmm, I’ve got an SE V7 (not X) but I’ve never tried it on snare. Maybe I will. I think it’s hypercardioid so makes sense it would be better with bleed. It’s mostly my scratch vocal go-to mic. Give it a shot! V7 is great on snare. I use one sometimes for scratch vocals as well.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 16:44:16 GMT -6
This might be the most GS thread I've read on this board. He asked about higher value workhorse multi patern mics and you guys are debating merits of rudimentary single patern mics. I think there are some $700 multi patern options that likely perform as well as $2000 mics. A 414 is going to work great for someone who has a good space and knows how to record with it. It's really only when you get to vocals that you might hear things from more expensive mics that can elude cheaper things. But you hear all the time of cheap mics winning out for certain sessions. LOL
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 17:02:12 GMT -6
Hey, Michael Jackson used an SM7, on Thriller. NOW... It's the most GS thread!
Minus all the gratuitous name calling, and pointless egotistical banter. Minus all the negative stuff too. Chris
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 30, 2019 19:23:08 GMT -6
What was the surprising $1100 mic in question? I knew I was going to get asked this, lol. I don’t feel it’s fair to reveal what it was, because the new options weren’t part of those tests. And the older clones aren’t talked about much anymore. I’ll PM anyone who really want to know. I think the new mic makers realized you need everything: a great transformer, a great selected tube, use high quality components, don’t skimp on anything in the signal path, good head basket, and make certain it sounds musical before it ships. So many mics fit this bill, it’s really up to the customer to choose, and I’d definitely think about installing a vintage tube if it doesn’t have one.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 19:30:52 GMT -6
The M88TG is "OK" on my voice, but the RE20 was a little better, and the SM7B better still (best.) I guess maybe it's like any other mic shootout it really depends on the specific singer. Something that I should mention is that as a singer I do not habitually eat the mic. That's really poor mic technique.
Normally (like at a lived gig ot rehearsal) I sing between 6" and a foot back from the mic depending on my dynamics and only come right up on the mic when I want to take advantage of proximity effect for a really low phrase or note.
The RE20, being a variable D mic, can't do that. I love my RE20s - for bass guitar, kick drum, and sometimes for guitar cabs, as well as occasionally for other people's vocals. They do not do what I require from a vocal mic.. Unfortunately it is not designed to do what I need
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 19:40:06 GMT -6
I've got two SM7B's, one SM7, and an RE20. The RE20 has more clarity and the SM7/Bs have more body. On vocals I usually prefer the SM7/Bs over the RE20. I've never bothered to shoot out the SM7 vs SM7B. Maybe someday. Tab Funkenwork still sells the upgraded transformer for the 57 and you can buy 57's pre-modded with them from Zen Pro Audio. I've been curious about the Crimson mods but I've never heard them. Until now the only issues I've ever seen or heard of someone having with the off-axis response of a 57 is with hi-hat bleed into a snare mic, but that's not exclusive to SM57's. I think the SE V7X is a little better in terms of high hat bleed when positioned on snare. At least that's what I tell myself. V7X is a great snare mic. Aluminum voice coils sound nasty. In mics and in speakers both, relative to copper. IMO the place where Shure really fucked up was switching to a (much cheaper) aluminum VC in the SM57 from the original copper.
Yes, some of the JBL speakers I like are aluminum - but the earlier (and corresponding PRO line speakers) with copper sound much better.
Copper has a much warmer sound. Aluminum has a nasty high mid resonance. Some people mistake that nasty resonance for "clarity" or "definition". It isn't. It's just a nasty resonance.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 20:05:36 GMT -6
5. Well, people will ask for my U87, my C12A, my Pearlman TM-1s, my KM84, and my Heiserman H-47.
Clients ask for your Heiserman and Pearlman's by name? That's surprising to me; I didn't think they had that much name recognition, especially with the Heiserman being so new. How are you liking the Heiserman so far? They ask for something "like a U47." The Pearlman comes close enough to the tube 47. The Heiserman comes VERY close to the FET. Have you tried either?
The Pearlman is currently the go-to mic on my own vocal, as well as front of kit and side of kit on drums. It's a VERY underrated mic.
Undedrstand, I don't take in much outside work, I don't advertise for it and I generally discourage most people who show "interest" - because in my experience thay're not rteally interested in spending what I require for what I have.
When I tell them that it's $350 for a roll of tape ( that lasts 30 minutes at 15 IPS)- to the pro audio dealer of their choice, not me - they usually lose interest.
Fine. Good riddance.
People I'm actually interested in recording are a different matter entirely.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 20:17:16 GMT -6
Makes total sense John, on the Pearlman/Heiserman.I have tried/sang through both-with both Dave P. and Eric both there respectively. Beautiful sounding microphones.
BTW... AFAIK Shure still uses the copper voice coil, on the 545. Chris
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 20:30:47 GMT -6
Makes total sense John, on the Pearlman/Heiserman. BTW... AFAIK Shure still uses the copper voice coil, on the 545. Chris Yes, they do. It used to be they used the same capsule on both - if you happen to purchase a very old 57 at a flea market or somewhere and it has the original cartridge you'll find it;s a black plastic shell painted over with the 57 grey - in other words, it's really a 545. In the really old Shure parts catalogs from the '60s you''ll find that it's the same parts number for the 57 and the 545. The change came in the mid '80s. In the old catalogs they stated that the 57 had a "selected 545 cartridge". You will not find this on the current Shure website as they have expunged all the older tech info, probably for publicity reasons.
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on May 30, 2019 20:50:48 GMT -6
I bought the TG mic because I wanted something versatile and sculptable to most styles. That's the most money I have spent on a single mic. It is proving to be just what I wanted.
I was and am a proponent for DIY and hi value low cost solutions. I bought into 4x 3u mics. They all perform very well, but have a style and don't sound as 3D on vocals as I was hoping.
I said it in the other thread and is probably the most telling... Current client reacted after I put up the TG and km84 clone for AcGTR. Said it sounded better, more real impressive and that was just in cans. I think it caused him to play and record better because of it. That I believe is the real benefit.
To your point... I think the price performance ratio is in the $1500-3000 range for a LD condenser that is going to be an all rounder. This is new market. I think the vintage market has to be left out of the equation.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 30, 2019 21:21:07 GMT -6
There's really good quality in the under 1k area now. The Lewitt 540 is 414-ish, with a better low end. The Roswell Delphos is a true all-rounder, the Warm WA47 sounds damn good, my buddy used it on his latest album. All of these are way better than any of the $300-$900 offerings just a couple of years ago.
When you get to the $1500-$2,000 price range, you get some serious competition against the holy grail mics. My Soyuz 0-19 FET topped a vintage M49 and C12 in a shootout I did, (the vintage U67 was my first choice, the U47 my second). The Blackspade UM-17R sounded something like a U47 and M49 had a baby. Now there's Stam, making mics with parts that other companies would ask 4k for, then Golden Age and others.
The benchmark workhorse mic is clearly the U87. Any of these will get you there, so it's important you know the type of sound you prefer.
That is actually the hard part, it takes time to learn the sounds of the classic mics well enough to discern the nuances that make them great. I used to record and produce a lot, and paid no attention to mics at all, other than to buy a U87 and go. Now I know more and want more. I think my new Stam SA67 will get me there when I get a new capsule in it. My Soyuz 0-19 covers the U87 zone nicely, now I just want one sweet tube mic, and a Soyuz 0-13 or a KM84.
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 21:32:44 GMT -6
Clients ask for your Heiserman and Pearlman's by name? That's surprising to me; I didn't think they had that much name recognition, especially with the Heiserman being so new. How are you liking the Heiserman so far? They ask for something "like a U47." The Pearlman comes close enough to the tube 47. The Heiserman comes VERY close to the FET. Have you tried either?
No, I haven’t. That’s why I asked how you’re liking it in my post that you quoted. I’ve used the originals they’re based on. Knowing what I know about clients that actually pay for studio time these days, I found it pretty incredible that you would have clients requesting a Heiserman or Pearlman by name. Turns out I was right. This has nothing to do with the quality of Heiserman or Pearlman, it just demonstrates the reality of the studio business these days. The only people who know what a Heiserman or Pearlman are are people on gear forums, and everyone on gear forums has their own studio and are therefore highly unlikely to pay money to use someone else’s studio.
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on May 31, 2019 0:16:01 GMT -6
If you record clients, I think the EMI and Abbey Road logos on the Chandler are a valuable part of the mic. They will inspire and instill confidence in the client.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 31, 2019 5:22:44 GMT -6
There's really good quality in the under 1k area now. The Lewitt 540 is 414-ish, with a better low end. The Roswell Delphos is a true all-rounder, the Warm WA47 sounds damn good, my buddy used it on his latest album. All of these are way better than any of the $300-$900 offerings just a couple of years ago. When you get to the $1500-$2,000 price range, you get some serious competition against the holy grail mics. My Soyuz 0-19 FET topped a vintage M49 and C12 in a shootout I did, (the vintage U67 was my first choice, the U47 my second). The Blackspade UM-17R sounded something like a U47 and M49 had a baby. Now there's Stam, making mics with parts that other companies would ask 4k for, then Golden Age and others. The benchmark workhorse mic is clearly the U87. Any of these will get you there, so it's important you know the type of sound you prefer. That is actually the hard part, it takes time to learn the sounds of the classic mics well enough to discern the nuances that make them great. I used to record and produce a lot, and paid no attention to mics at all, other than to buy a U87 and go. Now I know more and want more. I think my new Stam SA67 will get me there when I get a new capsule in it. My Soyuz 0-19 covers the U87 zone nicely, now I just want one sweet tube mic, and a Soyuz 0-13 or a KM84. Stam’s builds are basically a 1k DIY project assembled for you. If you choose a different builder you would basically get the same kind of thing, but pay a little more and loose the Stam wait time. I’ve spoken with Chad from Signal Arts Electronics and Chris from Barbaric Amplification about similar builds. What’s great about this are these DIY projects have been proven to be very good when paired with the right internal parts. When you start looking in the boutique market at Bock, FleA, or Tele you’re getting the same kind of thing, but with most materials made in house, and specifically designed to work together to acheive that company’s ideal sound for the microphone in question. A vintage U87 or a good 67 style mic are probably the best all rounder mics ever made, which is why U87s and U67s are so popular.
|
|
|
Post by bigbone on May 31, 2019 8:05:01 GMT -6
Client might ask for a brand name microphone because they have seen that name somewhere in the web as the best one.. Give them what they want to hear from the recording and they won't ask anything.Engineer skill is getting lost these days unfortunately.!!!
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 31, 2019 8:16:46 GMT -6
A vintage U87 or a good 67 style mic are probably the best all rounder mics ever made, which is why U87s and U67s are so popular. Ups to Vincent for bringing it back around! I was going to say . . . You know, bear down on the bite stick and find the cash for a GOOD used U87, and it will pay for itself over and over again for the rest of your life. I bought my current favorite U87 about 10 years ago and it has faithfully served any application I throw it into. I might fancy the U67, UM57, C12a, various C414s etc more at times . . . but this favorite U87 NEVER fails me.
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on May 31, 2019 8:52:26 GMT -6
A vintage U87 or a good 67 style mic are probably the best all rounder mics ever made, which is why U87s and U67s are so popular. Ups to Vincent for bringing it back around! I was going to say . . . You know, bear down on the bite stick and find the cash for a GOOD used U87, and it will pay for itself over and over again for the rest of your life. I bought my current favorite U87 about 10 years ago and it has faithfully served any application I throw it into. I might fancy the U67, UM57, C12a, various C414s etc more at times . . . but this favorite U87 NEVER fails me. Conversely, the going price of a U87 at 3K gets you into some sweet territory for today's boutique mics. Money matters for most of us, and for me to spend $3000 I'd want it to do more than "faithfully serve." I'm not saying I wouldn't find use for a U87 if the universe had one fall in my lap. But the whole gist of this thread is to try and determine what one needs to spend to buy a mic that will inspire and sound "high end." The current landscape of mic building seems to be changing rapidly for the better. I personally feel that the days of needing to overspend on vintage mics are in the process of coming to an end. I know that some here will disagree with that statement, and measuring things in tiny increments of "mojo" or psychoacoustics they may be right about old Neumanns or Telefunkens. But I for one like where things are headed with the new stuff.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on May 31, 2019 9:18:11 GMT -6
I know some people on here think it’s a cliche, but I think the sm7 is an outstanding mic. Ryan Hewitt said that for the Avett Brothers recordings he used 57’s on the acoustic guitars and SM7’s on the vocals. Maybe because I got them used to using them (they were uncontrolled screamers at the time) and they had already decided they were the most comfortable mic to use. : )
|
|