|
|
Post by kidvybes on Jul 5, 2014 16:40:48 GMT -6
...with the growing interest in DIY clone mics, as well the options to upgrade/swap and re-skin capsules now available from some very talented "capsule-techs" (for the lack of a better term), I ask those who have experience with both original vintage classics, and these new promising DIY options, what exactly is it that differentiates a great mic from the rest of the mic cabinet?...
...for me, oddly enough, now that I'm getting some experience using a few of these quality DIY options, it's the way these mics handle the more intimate "mouth noises" from the singers being tracked...these noises no longer seem to be distracting or annoying, but actually contribute to the realness, the intimacy and dimensional quality of the recording...
...what is it that you hear that assures you the mic is golden?...
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 5, 2014 17:41:00 GMT -6
I would say really good mics remain consistent in the frequency range regardless of the dynamic that's hitting it. It doesn't thin out or "freak" out like Shannon and I have talked about. There's also this "velvety buzzy" quality to the great mics I've heard. Almost like a reed instrument. Something that enhances the human voice and has a reed like quality. |
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Jul 5, 2014 18:09:48 GMT -6
There's also this "velvety buzzy" quality to the great mics I've heard. Almost like a reed instrument. Something that enhances the human voice and has a reed like quality. Interesting that you say that...recently I read a respected member of the GroupDIY's description of what he felt differentiates a good example of a U47-style mic, as an inherent "electrical" mid-tone that resonates in voices recorded with the mic...I related that to a buzzing quality, much like you describe...a textured resolution that's imparted by the mic, not the voice itself, yet it flatters the voice...think of a photograph printed from film rather than digital image, or a movie shot on film rather than digital media...that film texture/resolution gives the image a much more organic quality, as compared to the colder, more clinical digital image... Good description, John... |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 5, 2014 18:17:42 GMT -6
Yep - that's a great description too. I've always hated to say the word "buzz"...but it's a good description. It definitely reminds me of that chesty-ness you feel if you sit in front of a contra bass or an alto sax.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchtower on Jul 5, 2014 18:22:34 GMT -6
Got it. Good mics sound like bassoons.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 5, 2014 18:25:03 GMT -6
Wrong. English Horns.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jul 5, 2014 19:39:41 GMT -6
French horns. Michael Jackson was fond of those... My best description of a wonderful sounding vintage mic is they recreate through the speakers what we hear standing in the room during the performance. It's about that simple. When I hear folks describe this mic sounds like this or this mic sounds like that, then something is wrong with the mic. A microphone is an ear. It should simply pass along what is given to it. All that said, there are a million tiny nuanses to any given mic including amplification, placement ect that makes a difference in the sound. But when I record something or someone, I want to hear in the mix what they really sound like. A quality mic does that. Doesn't have to be vintage but it helps  |
|
|
|
Post by bluesprocket on Jul 5, 2014 20:52:34 GMT -6
... what is it that you hear that assures you the mic is golden?... Oh there ya go just ask an easy one... I wont just speak to vintage mics, but to any great mic of which there are many good examples these days. Just because you own a vintage mic does not mean you have a great mic. I've heard a number of coveted vintage classics that might have been amazing once but were no more, and modern copies that flat out nail what the good specimens of the breads have going for them. So in the end its really the results that matter. What I've found amongst the "great" mics I've had the privilege to use through the years is a depth and realism that you just can't create after the fact. But while a big part of that is a great mic, just as important is matching the right great mic with the thing you're recording. When you can do that its like there is an extra thing that become part of the track, and its not just sound...its emotion. I did a vocal shootout for an artist some time ago at the beginning of a project. We had some beautiful vintage mics and a few modern gems. All of them sounded "good", and probably any of them would have been "good enough", but when we found the right one its like there was an undeniable connection. The vocalist knew it immediately, and every little inflections and emotive thing that they did came through on that mic in just the right proportions. In that case it was a Korby 251 that won the day, but I've had the exact same experience with an AT 4047 or a MD441. I really doubt that helps add anything to the conversation, but for me its about finding the mic that makes the connection. |
|
|
|
Post by Shannon on Jul 5, 2014 21:01:06 GMT -6
This thread is gonna cuz a lot of panties in a bunch. Lmfao I agree with all above. I'm so blessed to have heard so many Mics, and so many awesome ones, it wasn't till bout 4yrs ago that I even heard anything outside the Akg, Nuemann, Studer, Schoepps mic line. No not snobbery, just was only thing worked on. That classic vintage sound is always made up of the same words description and qualities. Then seems to go in tangent from there. Cowboy makes a awesome point, we tend to get caught up with what it sounds lie rather does it sound good. We all have ears some better than others, ,but your ears are always the best judge. If it sounds good then it sounds good. I don't believe it have to sound like something to be da shit. I've experienced this firsthand when you try to make a knock off, or a clone then your pigeonholed. You ever hear the saying the reason why you wrap your hamster with electrical and or duct tape?  That way when u screw it that it doesn't explode. ( come on laugh with me not at me) Kinda of the same deal with clone or knock off, your screwded. The sound is lost in a comparison rather then if it sounds good lmfao You should be able to hear texture in your voices, it should be without limitation, kinda like John k. said about it being constant always even when pushing it Word like creamy, velvety, warm......etc. Nothing like piercing, thin, and shit should be mentioned. Anywho that is more of a tangent than I wanted to go I'm gonna stop while I'm ahead I have a 3 second rule after you listen does it make you smile believe in yourself more and put your vocalist on top of the world then that the Mic |
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Jul 5, 2014 22:04:25 GMT -6
Cowboy makes a awesome point, we tend to get caught up with what it sounds lie rather does it sound good. We all have ears some better than others, ,but your ears are always the best judge. If it sounds good then it sounds good. I don't believe it have to sound like something to be da shit. I've experienced this firsthand when you try to make a knock off, or a clone then your pigeonholed. You ever hear the saying the reason why you wrap your hamster with electrical and or duct tape? That way when u screw it that it doesn't explode. ( come on laugh with me not at me) Kinda of the same deal with clone or knock off, your screwded. The sound is lost in a comparison rather then if it sounds good lmfao Well said, sinsay!!!... ...actually I tried to make a very similar point in the GroupDIY C12 build thread...my C12 was one of the designer's prototype builds, and when I didn't go with the obvious choice for the capsule, I heard a lot of static about, "not the historically accurate C12 sound", etc, etc...my response was, I'm not really interested in a "historically accurate C12 clone" (whatever the hell that may be), but rather a really great sounding mic, (that happens to owe some of it's design heritage to a classic)...and that's what I got...the mic sounds really good!... ...and now I'm getting my "251" built the same way (with a good dose of 47-ish in the mix)...not concerned about whether or not it personifies the classic profile...I know what I'm looking for, and I'll recognize it when I hear it...nuff said! |
|
|
|
Post by Shannon on Jul 6, 2014 1:22:44 GMT -6
Hells yea good for you. Just like music evolves it time now for the sounds be something to build a future on. When the day comes and we say when I was a young one we only had 4 Mics to record with that was we had and we did it u young brats. We don't have the choices that you do nowadays. We had it rough we made it work. If it wasn't for us music wouldn't be what it is today. Then maybe five years 10 years who knows?
I want to be a part of that evolution by going against the grain moving forward creating new tools, ways to capture sound and how we hear them. I believe it so much that I've been working on a project to do so. ( that all I can say right now). Pushing The envelope limits, and methods to do so.
Hell when I was a kid we drive to Studios. You kids nowadays have it easy.
Sinsay 7/14
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Jul 6, 2014 9:16:37 GMT -6
Got it. Good mics sound like bassoons. They make voices sound like bassoons! |
|
|
|
Post by jimwilliams on Jul 6, 2014 11:20:55 GMT -6
If I ever had a hair up my ass to use a super expensive and rare german mic, I wouldn't ever think of buying one.
I'd rent it and save the money.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jul 6, 2014 15:48:19 GMT -6
You're a wise man Jim! Never buy anything you don't use every day if you can rent it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 6, 2014 15:54:21 GMT -6
A Neumann U67 is $100 a day at Blackbird. I would think I would use it 100 times even in one year. So - at that rental rate, it would pay for itself in a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Jul 6, 2014 16:11:13 GMT -6
A Neumann U67 is $100 a day at Blackbird. I would think I would use it 100 times even in one year. So - at that rental rate, it would pay for itself in a year. ...ain't math great! |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jul 6, 2014 17:43:43 GMT -6
A Neumann U67 is $100 a day at Blackbird. I would think I would use it 100 times even in one year. So - at that rental rate, it would pay for itself in a year. Plus the fact that it will appreciate in value. The saying that I've heard is, "buy what appreciates, rent what depreciates". |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,098 
|
Post by ericn on Jul 6, 2014 19:05:22 GMT -6
A couple of years ago my good buddy Brad was in Nashville for a couple of days. Brad owns a Korby Cat system but untill then had little exposure and a ton of gear lust for The Classics directly. I convinced him to book a couple of hours at Blackbird, he did a quick session of himself doing vocals through a 251, C12, U47 U67 and a Korby system.
The 2 thing he learned that day were
1 The mics have more in common than any body likes to admit, they are not about frequency response . although all are subtlety different they all off this huge sence of realism.
These great mics each give you an unbelievable audio vision of what's happening and on a talented source won't suck, but will show the worts of those not up to the task !
2 the Korby was 95 percent "there" he has decided that he cares less about the versatility and wants to spend what he can on getting to 98-100 there!
I guess what I am trying to say if your chasing that sonic nirvana , don't spend your time on the net, save some cash
Book a room and find what's going to work for you.
In other words literally shut up and listen!
|
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Jul 6, 2014 19:56:57 GMT -6
1 The mics have more in common than any body likes to admit, they are not about frequency response . although all are subtlety different they all off this huge sence of realism.  |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jul 7, 2014 7:13:14 GMT -6
OK, I'm going to start a riot with my opinion...
What people consider "great", usually sounds boring..
But that's exactly why we(I) love them. When we audition mics, we always seem to do it solo'd. "Put up a few mics and did some vocals through them" is a common thing we hear in these situations.. Which I think is absolutely useless.
The reason that a lot of cheap mics got on the map was because of their attributes. Scooped mids, sizzling highs(commonly mistaken for "detail"), excessive proximity effect(commonly mistaken for "extended range") all contributed to accentuating the Fletcher-Munson loudness curve and making things sound exciting to those without the knowledge, I.E., the pro-sumer market that has never used a "good" mic and wants retardedly low prices for something that has always been out of reach, (see also: Greed).
Little did we all know that while this sounds fine solo'd, this sucks balls in the mix. The human voice is a midrange instrument. We hear our best in the 1k-3khz range, so human voices are centered around that region(Ain't evolution grand?). So what do we do in the mix? We carve out the mids for the voice to sit.. Which doesn't work with cheap mics because they are all highs and lows, so most end up boosting the highs even more to get more "detail" and next thing we know, we have a grainy mess and an engineer bitching about the mic and vowing to either mod it or get something else(usually the next more expensive mic) in order to fix the issue, rather than realizing that they've been bamboozled by the marketing of a mic that does not "sound like a U87 for 100$!".
Now what does this have to do with why I love certain mics? Great mics always sound boring solo'd. They don't have the exciting crazy proximity effect nor do they have the excessively grainy high end that emulates "detail" in so many people's minds. They typically have a flat midrange with no peaks for the ear to catch. They don't have a lot of harmonics or other spurious products that can make things seem more rich either.
You stick this in the mix and the pure midrange that these mics recreate suddenly sticks out and becomes part of the music, opposite of a cheap mic. It sounds like a vocal track without resorting to a bunch of EQ to try to make it usable. Things are just easier with a great mic.
They just recreate what they hear and do it boringly, but faithfully, which is why I love mics with some quality pedigree.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jul 7, 2014 7:23:41 GMT -6
1 The mics have more in common than any body likes to admit I admit it all the time when I say that "once you get above a certain level of quality, any mic is usable" but folks seem to either ignore my posts or rally against it while they argue for infinitesimal levels of difference in some specific mic that they are attempting to talk themselves into buying. I still stand by it though, once you get above a certain level of quality, any mic is usable. The rest is just someone getting hung up on small details that are likely lost in the mix. Again, I think most people audition vocal mics solo'd and they also do it on themselves, which leads to a twofold problem. 1. Solo'd mics can sound completely different in a mix, so auditioning a solo'd mic is useless. 2. Listening to yourself through a mic opens a can of worms with ego and self-projection. Your mind has an idea of how you sound, and it will protect your ego by fooling yourself into thinking you sound better than you do. That's part of the reason we always think we sound very different on a recording than we think we sound in reality. I think this is essentially useless too. In this case I think someone should always audition a mic on someone else. You'll get a much better perception of how the mic will work, without the ego biases involved in doing it yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by ephi82 on Jul 7, 2014 8:52:07 GMT -6
...what is it that you hear that assures you the mic is golden?...
I think the answer is simple:
You dont hear the mic, you hear a sound (a voice, or whatever source) that simply is wonderful, silky, fully dimensional and so sonically pleasing that you are drawn into, immersed in it, making you want to hear it again and again.
Example:
A couple of weeks ago I had my SM-81 on my Martin, in the perfect spot in the room, with just the right amount gain and compression. "Golden"
Also, there is no question that certain vintage mics have a very musical "distortion or buzz" that is just at the limits of our hearing and it sounds "Golden". I don't think its terribly different than the way drums sound on tape when pushed.
It's imperfections that are musical.........(and sometimes the result of happy accidents in design limitations)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 10:24:20 GMT -6
I've surely got a little different take on this than most people on the forum. I don't record pop music at all--I'm strictly a classical music guy. Because I use a number of stereo mic techniques (ORTF, Blumlein, M/S), I've come to value off-axis response as a key factor in mic performance. In this usage, almost every part of the ensemble hits the mic at an angle. If the off-axis response is uneven--especially between both mics in a pair--the image is unfocused and will sometimes wander.
I do agree with the general statement that a really good microphone may sound quite neutral (although a more "forward" mic may be the right solution for a singer or a spot). But the first place I look is usually the polar pattern at multiple frequencies. After that, it's self-noise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jul 7, 2014 11:32:17 GMT -6
Off axis response is also critical for pop music because it makes placement far less critical. This allows working lots faster which yields more usable first takes. Great performances are fleeting moments in time. The Neumann KM-84 and 86, if you can find one, are the all time champs and my personal desert island microphones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 13:32:04 GMT -6
Off axis response is also critical for pop music because it makes placement far less critical. This allows working lots faster which yields more usable first takes. Great performances are fleeting moments in time. The Neumann KM-84 and 86, if you can find one, are the all time champs and my personal desert island microphones. Well maybe you won't throw me off the island then. I've had a pair of KM-140s for ages (very similar capsule to the KM-84). Boy do I love those mics! |
|
That way when u screw it that it doesn't explode. ( come on laugh with me not at me) Kinda of the same deal with clone or knock off, your screwded. The sound is lost in a comparison rather then if it sounds good lmfao 
