How often to you use De-Essing in a mix

much better mics from what I've read.

I wish I read all this stuff before buying


Believe d-essers are sometimes used in mastering too?

I built this 251, and I'm getting what for me seem to be some spectacular and inspiring vocal sounds, really got me going right now.  This mic makes me sound like a better singer.  The problem is I seem to need a De-Esser on almost any given performance.  I don't consider myself a particularly sibilant singer, in fact my voice is actually probably better described as somewhat dark.

I am using an ADK GK-12d capsule.  I am fairly certain that if I changed my capsule to a Heiserman, Campbell, or BeezNeez, the presence boost would move into the air regions and give that flatter darker mid you'd expect from a CK12 microphone.  I've done some intensive internet research, and I do believe this particular ADK capsule to have some of that spittiness or edginess to it.  I love the low end on it though.  I'm getting a very 'warm' sound in the mids and bottom.  I had some similar issues with my similarly of Chinese provenance Peluso capsules which are long gone.  Also not a true CK-12.  I have yet to try out a properly made CK12, by that I mean historical correctness of the complex acoustic chamber in the backplates.  This is ADK's brightest capsule, and you can hear it.  I could also consider the ADK GK-251d capsule, which might give a similar but somewhat darker tonality.

This reminds me of my Peluso 2247 SE, which always seemed to need some little EQ, so it fell out of favor.  I know EQ is very common, de-essing is probably fairly common, I just for some reason expect a vocal mic to sound nearly ideal when recorded flat.  I do have a couple mics that sort of work like that.  I don't know if that is a realistic expectation or if I should think more of a 'perfect vocal chain' involving these other elements as a standard practice.

It's just a little nerve-wracking because it's so close, and there's not a whole lot of DIY kind of work left to do at this point.  I've darkened the top and boosted the lows as much as I comfortably can, the problem zone is in that tricky high-midrange area.  With a little de-essing and avoiding top end boosts, the vocals sound great, and sit in a good place in the mix.  Well, way up front.  A couple DIY options I haven't experimented with are lowering the capsule polarization voltage, and/or using the second half of the tube as a buffer to lower THD and tube coloration.

Backing off the mic seems to help some, my natural tendency is to get right up on it.  Maybe I just need to practice better engineering depending on what mic is set up.

I don't know if I've been lazy, sloppy, or lucky, but I have very rarely had to use de-essing on most of the mixes I've done in the past 15 years.  To suddenly need it all the time seems kind of strange to me.  I was looking around the net, and it seems like a lot of people use it somewhat to very frequently as a matter of course.

I guess I'm curious what people think about de-essing in general.  If it comes up a lot and you just do it, or if you put in all kind of setup to completely avoid it?

I'll probably end up with a different capsule.  If you had a mic with sibilance problems would you think it was a bad mic?

I built this 251... The problem is I seem to need a De-Esser on almost any given performance.

I believe it's a Nichicon Gold at the moment.

Wow that's some really specific feedback!  I'll have to give the Elna a try.  I really like the Silmics in my mic preamps.  I had no idea that particular cap could make that much difference!

My grid to ground resistor is up to 60 Megaohms, 30M was just way too thin and shrill with this capsule.

This?

reverb.com/item/1402020-shure-sm57-lower-z-microphone-impedance-reducing-adaptor

Appears to be a pile of mis-information for one thing, the seller in question don't seem to know what they are talking about.  It has to be a 620 ohm resistor across pins 2-3 to present a lower impedance to the mic than the preamp does naturally.  

The comment that preamps were designed as 600 ohms is absolute non-sense.  Preamps were virtually always bridging impedance as they are today, with a few exceptions.  

It's reported in audio magazines for several decades that a Shure 57 or 58 sounds better at 600 ohms, giving them flatter response with a reduced treble peak in the sibilant area.  

As to the effect on other mics, any time you present a lower Z load than expected, you roll off the highs in a dynamic mic.  In a condenser you lower it's headroom and increase it's distortion, depending on the type you may also reduce it's treble content.  

I designed the NT-2 and NT-1, not the A versions that are surface mount. I've rebuilt a lot of dbx 902's but I've never had a reason to use one in the last 40 years. Pick the mic and preamp carefully and those things will collect dust. Sibilance is acceptable and necessary for a natural sound. Over use that stuff and the singers get a lisp and sound gay.

Put the mic between 6 to 12 feet from the singers mouth, pointed down.

That's most plosive and sibilence issues sorted. The real problem is people eating the mic.