|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 19, 2016 22:13:28 GMT -6
I guess all those major league producers and engineers, who have been in charge of making some of the finest albums in history that have easy access to any mic in the world to make their next award winning albums must like hashy, flat Chinese sounding mics like me ;-)
Maybe I'm a microphone chubby chaser, but I guess I like em' like that.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 15,124
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 20, 2016 5:22:35 GMT -6
Martin, I think you are spot on using the term colour as the soyuz had a quality the other mikes didn't. On the right source this would compliment. So, I understood Tony to be commenting on the accuracy of the mikes. Personally on vocals I preferred the soyuz in the clip but my spidey senses were tingling, wondering what I would conclude if I used the soyuz on a variety of sources: what about a rich mid bass source say cello ?
I, like you, liked that extra body on the acoustic:nice that you had a chance to demo.
The fet ldc could be an interesting combo. Hopefully you can demo that too !
Thx for the clip:well done and it's only natural that there are differences of opinion.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Feb 20, 2016 7:32:22 GMT -6
I probably don't have the ears for my argument about what you all call accuracy and detail to stand, but Martin's clip sounds real good to me. When I listened to the other video involving the Soyez in a shoot-out, I thought it was one of the standouts. Martin, what was the mic you used on "All Over Again?"
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 20, 2016 17:18:10 GMT -6
Hi Guys, on All Again, I used my Blackspade UM-17B. That mic has some real mojo, but I could never find a workaround for the way it pinched when hit hard, which was because of my voice, not the mic.. All Again was a soft vocal. I know it was my voice, because it sounded amazing when my wife was singing. Week after next, I'll have the newly designed UM-17B, I've sent mine to Blackspade for an upgrade and capsule change, (from Blueline to Redline). Blackspade has made some significant improvements to what was already a really good mic. The new one has parts that are identical to some mics selling for $4,000 to $6,000, so it should be interesting to have.
If it still turns out I'm not as compatible with it as I'd like to be, I'll move on to maybe the Soyuz 0-19 if I like it anywhere near as much as the 0-17. I do have high hopes for the UM-17B though. Blackspade have been one of the finest companies I've ever dealt with. They advised me all along the way when I ordered the Thiersch Blueline from them for the upgrade of my original mic, and have helped me understand some important aspects of the designs of classic mics like the C-12, M-49, U-47, and others.
Differences of opinion are fine by me. It's the way they're expressed that's important when we're all trying to keep a good thing going like we have here at Real Gear.
To me, the sleeper here in the video are the 0-11 SDC's. They have the same coloring, smooth sloped top, clean lows, and a rich fat middle. I've tried lots of mics for acoustic guitar, and the king of the hill for me has been the Neumann K-84. Nothing else came close. The Soyuz 0-11 is right there with it. There's something special going on, because I didn't need any EQ at all, zilch. The sound on this track is what I've been looking for. It's kind of like the 84, but a little fuller and livelier. I wasn't kidding in the video, stick a K-84 and an 0-11 in front of me, and I think I'd grab the 0-11.
One reason is I like the idea of having something that sounds a little different than so many other recordings on my tracks, but is still high end.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 20, 2016 20:02:46 GMT -6
The blueline pinches when you hit it hard - at least it did on me. For certain people, it just doesn't work. I can't make any of Shannon's capsules collapse...
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 20, 2016 20:31:49 GMT -6
I'm beginning to think you're right John. I'll have a new mic soon, and if I find the same thing, I'll be certain. The other components in Blackspade's mics are also high end, so it's likely the capsule if there's a pinch of harshness.
Strange, that one of the most recommended capsules (Thiersch M7 Blueline) has inconsistencies.
I'm curious which readily available capsule people think are the most consistent and best sounding, Neumann's K67, or Tim Campbell's C-12?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 20, 2016 23:27:32 GMT -6
I don't know if it's an "inconsistency..." so to speak...I'm sure there's a term for the phenomena. Some would probably tell us to learn better mic technique - although I don't think that's what it is. Shannon and I were talking about it one time and he kind of described it in layman's terms as if the capsule freaks out and tenses up. To me, the measure of a great capsule is when it stays consistent throughout the frequency range no matter what the dynamics are. That being said, the blueline has a beautiful top end - I could see using it on acoustics and a lot of singers.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 21, 2016 1:37:40 GMT -6
I didn't notice any phase issues. I purposely tracked at lower levels, my first attempt at decent gain staging. Thanks for all the help you guys have offered, I do think it's getting better now. Dude, that guitar sounds (to quote Chris Stapleton) AMAZE-BALLS and AWESOME SAUCE! Most of that sound is in his hands. One thing I'll say about Martin is he knows how to get everything a guitar has out of it.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 21, 2016 1:40:45 GMT -6
I bought a Soyuz 017 after hearing a demo. Fantastic mic with genuine very seductive tone. I am very familiar with classic tube mics and here we operate some M50's, M49's and U47's. Soyuz is, in my opinion, the equal of the classics. TONE generator. I am bothered by people not recognizing that Russian production methods are perhaps not as technology oriented (latest CNC machines) as the west. Anyone who has visited Russia knows that. However, just like in the olden days in Austria and Germany, hand work was how they started and how many classic mics that we all admire were made. Also bogus to dis the mic while observing certain circuitry or even complaining about a simple circuit. All without hearing the mic! The Soyuz has some serious mic people behind it. Otherwise they could never produce the TONE generator that they have made. Good to have you back Hudson!
|
|
|
Post by chasmanian on Feb 21, 2016 4:23:23 GMT -6
"........pinches when you hit it hard."
my own amateur personal term for the phenomena is simply overload. the capsule says: "thats too loud for me. you have exceeded the range in which I will capture in a pleasing manner. back off, brother."
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 21, 2016 11:23:37 GMT -6
You're not wrong Chas, I was being a little too forward too often when tracking lead vocals. It's partially due to not being able to get a really good headphone mix, with the tracks back far enough to hear the vocal loud and clear. Cowboycoalminer recommended I try a headphone amp, which I'll do at some point soon. Also, I plead guilty of not gain staging properly, causing some nasty tones. I know there's a lot more to it, but at least I've finally committed to tracking between -18db and -12db from now on.
Thanks for the compliment cowboy, I've been using my Taylor Doyle Deluxe for tracking, and it's bright and tight in the bottom, but not quite as rich as the Martin I was used to. It's good for some things though.I might start borrowing a few of my buddy's guitars next time. He has this little CEO Martin that he got last year, and it's the best sounding Gibson style guitar Gibson never made, ha!
|
|
|
Post by chasmanian on Feb 21, 2016 11:54:18 GMT -6
right on Martin. I was talking from personal experience. the following is all imho. thousands of hours monitoring myself through headphones, recording myself singing accompanying myself on acoustic guitar. 1 microphone. moving my head around, varying how loud or soft I'm singing, applying vocal fry and various resonances of my voice, and searching around for where different microphone's (but just 1 at a time of course),...........well, lets just call it exploring. thats exactly what it is. I always record in cardioid. different microphones have smaller or larger pickup or capture areas. and they have sweet spots if you will, that if you say, sing a little louder at a certain time in a song, will pleasantly gently distort. it is a very pleasing, beautiful tone that I'm talking about here. it makes for magic, eh? as for gain staging, the more I do it, the more I am leaning towards spinning the knobs til it sounds good. if I have peaks that are at -5 or -6, well than so be it. I'm trying to get it all right and finished on the front end, on the original capture. but then, I am not planning on putting any overdubs in. maybe a little reverb on mixdown. and done. I think you can drive yourself nuts, trying to do everything perfect with gain staging and all. and losing sight of the forest for the trees. great song and great performance dwarfs everything else.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,954
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Feb 21, 2016 21:14:43 GMT -6
You're not wrong Chas, I was being a little too forward too often when tracking lead vocals. It's partially due to not being able to get a really good headphone mix, with the tracks back far enough to hear the vocal loud and clear. Cowboycoalminer recommended I try a headphone amp, which I'll do at some point soon. Also, I plead guilty of not gain staging properly, causing some nasty tones. I know there's a lot more to it, but at least I've finally committed to tracking between -18db and -12db from now on. Thanks for the compliment cowboy, I've been using my Taylor Doyle Deluxe for tracking, and it's bright and tight in the bottom, but not quite as rich as the Martin I was used to. It's good for some things though.I might start borrowing a few of my buddy's guitars next time. He has this little CEO Martin that he got last year, and it's the best sounding Gibson style guitar Gibson never made, ha! Martin after about a year of hearing your stuff I have to say, I think your getting to the point where your starting to think to much like an AE and less like an artist! Relax my friend ! Maybe bring in somebody to AEehen your shooting for the keeper! Your a great Writer and Performer, don't over think it !
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 21, 2016 22:28:20 GMT -6
Thank you Eric, that's truly appreciated at the moment, as I've been struggling with this very issue the last couple of weeks, trying to figure out where best to aim my sights.
I had such a huge learning curve to handle when I first began recording at home in in a DAW in 2012. I barely understood what a plug-in was then! So I did immerse myself in all the gear talk because I had so much catching up to do, but you're right, it's time to focus on what I love most again.
When I read about all the amazing things some of the more experienced engineers can do, it make sense to hand off the ball now, and get back to my real focus as an artist. I could work on it for the next 5 years, and still not have the engineering chops of some of the guys here.
Having the right mic sure does make it a to easier though. With the Soyuz, it was easy to get something good done.
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Apr 17, 2016 6:49:28 GMT -6
Martin, Thanks for posting the video with the Soyuz mics. It helped me decide to pull the trigger on a matched pair of Soyuz 011s. I received them Friday and so far have only used them on acoustic guitar, but I could not be happier. Prior to these I was using a matched pair of Miktek C5s which were pretty good, but for me the Soyuz 011s are in a whole other league. I don't have a KM84 to compare them to, but having used one in the past, I no longer feel like I am missing out on anything. The craftsmanship on these are outstanding and the recorded sound is pretty much exactly what you present to them. They almost make me feel like I am cheating. The best way I can explain them is they have the articulation of a SDC with the richness of a LDC. The only bad thing about them, is now I want to check out the 017 and 019.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 17, 2016 9:22:00 GMT -6
Congratulations Mike!!! That so cool. The 0-11, and the 0-17 have their own sound, for sure. It just wraps you up in it. If I had to, I'd almost want the 0-11 first, use a different high quality LDC for a while, then get the Soyuz 0-17.
Soyuz is coming out with a less expensive FET version of the 0-17, the 0-19. Here's where I've landed lately, the pickup pattern of each mic when set for cardioid is different. The ones that are often called "right" seem to be the ones who's pickup patterns are just right, big, but not too wide. The U-67 and U-87 come to mind. The new FET version will have the same capsule, so I already know it stands a great chance of being "right" I can't wait to try one.
I had the lovely Bock 195 when I first started, and it's pickup pattern was just too wide for my tastes, although it sounded great. It was the best LDC I'd ever heard on acoustic guitar though...
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Apr 17, 2016 10:28:59 GMT -6
Thanks Martin. I think I would like to check out the 0-19. My primary LDC mic is a Perlman TM-250 so the 0-19 might be a nice complement to it. Thanks for your feedback. Please post something if you get the chance to try out the 0-19.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 17, 2016 11:50:13 GMT -6
Will do mikec.
|
|