|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 3, 2019 11:10:24 GMT -6
Interesting mic. I'd like to try one - or actually two - for awhile. The thing with mics or synths or huge guitar sounds or really any type of sound is how it fits in the mix. Sometimes big is beautiful. And sometimes big is....well....too big. There's really only one way to know and that's to use it in a variety of contexts over time and see how it works. Demo's only go so far. You've got to pick a mic that WORKS for any particular situation. As much as I love my KM53's, they don't get used nearly as much as my KM86's because quite often, the 53's are just TOO detailed. It's almost like walking into a bright light naked. TOO much detail. LOL Often, they are just not the right mic IMO. But there's one thing that is for sure - we KNOW how a U87 works in context - in a record. (Fantastically IMO) And it's stood the test of time. If the TG mic makes you feel the U87 is broken, I'd be wondering about how I'd use the TG and what it would take to make it work right in the mix. When something throws my instincts upside down, the caution flags come out. All that said, I still REALLY wanna try them.... <<thumbsup>> Chadler. Love that a company is "doing their own thing!!!!!" Very true on the “how it fits in a mix” thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Feb 3, 2019 11:17:49 GMT -6
P.s. and fwiw...you can make the TG skinny too, it’s just that its sonic footprint is more on par with a tube mic than a FET; It’s up in your grill regardless of the way you shape it. Also in a way, it has this ‘don’t need a compressor’ thing going on, where it’s very uniform with how it responds to dynamics. Hope that makes sense... In the middle of writing the manual... It would be interesting to hear some examples of what you're talking about as far as making it "skinny" goes. |
|
|
|
Post by spock on Feb 3, 2019 11:27:34 GMT -6
P.s. and fwiw...you can make the TG skinny too, it’s just that its sonic footprint is more on par with a tube mic than a FET; It’s up in your grill regardless of the way you shape it. Also in a way, it has this ‘don’t need a compressor’ thing going on, where it’s very uniform with how it responds to dynamics. Hope that makes sense... In the middle of writing the manual... It would be interesting to hear some examples of what you're talking about as far as making it "skinny" goes. I don’t have any at the moment, though it will never sound like it’s in a tin can, the ability shape is in there between the Tape EQ & and low-cut modifiers combined. One of the things I’ve taken away from demoing it with folks is, how they realize the differences when they change the settings are not subtle, I.e. you make a change and you get a response, but that’s our mo anyway. 😛 |
|
|
|
Post by shoe on Feb 3, 2019 11:38:25 GMT -6
It would be interesting to hear some examples of what you're talking about as far as making it "skinny" goes. I don’t have any at the moment, though it will never sound like it’s in a tin can, the ability shape is in there between the Tape EQ & and low-cut modifiers combined. One of the things I’ve taken away from demoing it with folks is, how they realize the differences when they change the settings are not subtle, I.e. you make a change and you get a response, but that’s our mo anyway. 😛 So, in the vocal test I had seen a while back online, I noticed quite a bit of sibilance on the male vocals. Are there settings that can de-emphasize sibilance? |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 3, 2019 11:59:32 GMT -6
I don’t have any at the moment, though it will never sound like it’s in a tin can, the ability shape is in there between the Tape EQ & and low-cut modifiers combined. One of the things I’ve taken away from demoing it with folks is, how they realize the differences when they change the settings are not subtle, I.e. you make a change and you get a response, but that’s our mo anyway. 😛 So, in the vocal test I had seen a while back online, I noticed quite a bit of sibilance on the male vocals. Are there settings that can de-emphasize sibilance? Yeah the Vintage King male vocal was pretty crispy and that red-flagged my ears too. But I've heard others where there wasn't a hint of harshness. We'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by spock on Feb 3, 2019 12:03:25 GMT -6
shoe however source dependent, sibilance isn’t really a chatacteristic of the mic. That said, I believe one setting with low-cut 50 was employed regardless of the source for the entirety, which didn’t make any sense; the whole point of the mic is the ability to modify it best capture the source at hand. It’s not your average mic, regardless of gender class and variance of voices in that class, there’s about 20 options to find one that’s suits.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 3, 2019 12:12:33 GMT -6
Yeah I suspected they were boosting one of the EQs when they shouldn't have been.
Edit: Looks like it was on NAB/IEC 7.5 ips for that male vox.
Double Edit: Actually they try several EQ settings on that male vox. Might just not be a good fit for that guys esses. Too crispy for me
They never did just flat though.
|
|
|
|
Post by spock on Feb 3, 2019 12:26:40 GMT -6
Yeah I suspected they were boosting one of the EQs when they shouldn't have been. Edit: Looks like it was on NAB/IEC 7.5 ips for that male vox. Double Edit: Actually they try several EQ settings on that male vox. Might just not be a good fit for that guys esses. Too crispy for me They never did just flat though. This is a point I’m trying to make about the modifiers and combinations, the low-cuts don’t simply roll-off, they are intended to modify the curve beyond that. Had they taken it off, different result and not subtle, ragan this is why you heard the mic sound very different. The user sets the mic for what’s apropos for the source and equally important what they are trying to achieve: those other mics in our examples have one sound, the TG has many. |
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Feb 3, 2019 12:35:31 GMT -6
No sibilance on me, within the settings of my previous post. I'm an excellent litmus test for this! "Don't worry, be happy" fortune cookie say. (In honor of Chinese New Year)
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 3, 2019 12:45:55 GMT -6
Yeah and again, I’ve heard other samples where sibilance doesn’t seem to be an issue at all.
Really looking forward to checking this thing out. I’m pretty sibilant too. It’s one of the reasons I’ve stuck with the 67. Nothing else has ever smoothed my voice like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 3, 2019 13:30:02 GMT -6
I’ll post two that sound amazing
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Feb 3, 2019 14:14:51 GMT -6
The comments make me wonder... I have a Rode Classic that sounds like a totally different mic with its hi-pass filters engaged. Somehow it picks up less room when hipass filters engaged? Its not really just getting rid of rumble, its makes the top end less harsh and much less sensitive to distant ambient sound. Took me years before I realized how the high pass filter changes the whole personality of the mic. Would you describe this mic the same way, the switches don't just perform EQ, but really change the personality? Is this typical experience of good mics with switching options? Or is this something where my Rode is maybe broken?
|
|
|
|
Post by spock on Feb 3, 2019 14:52:28 GMT -6
There’s also a third component, the two input systems of the TG Microphone—System A vs System B, these have a further effect upon the sounds available from the Microphone; it’s a combination off all three.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 3, 2019 16:01:30 GMT -6
I’ve heard and recorded a few thing first hand. I haven’t mixed with it...but I can’t imagine that being a problem. It takes EQ extremely well because there aren’t any “problem” frequencies. E.g. when you pull out the bottom you aren’t left with harsh midrange. Sometimes those mids can be masked by a big bottom and once you start EQing you start chasing your tail. I don’t hear that with this one. I never got to hear the REDD mic in my own studio. It sounded great in the place I heard it...but this one really wowed me and is extremely versatile.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 3, 2019 16:02:35 GMT -6
I let me say - I absolutely don’t get paid to say that. If I get one, I’ll be buying it myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by reddirt on Feb 3, 2019 17:08:01 GMT -6
Stuffed if I know how a mic can sound too big and not be HPF'd or whatever suits to make it work.
I would have thought that's a great "problem" to have ; either that or I've still got a lot to learn on that score.
Feel free to school me.
Cheers, Ross
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 3, 2019 18:39:40 GMT -6
Stuffed if I know how a mic can sound too big and not be HPF'd or whatever suits to make it work. Cheers, Ross If it's too big, yeah, there are ways to make it "smaller". When I'm recording, I'll always navigate to a mic, guitar, keyboard, etc. that makes the source sound the way I want it to if at all possible. Sometimes it's not possible though. But the reality is that there's only so much room in a mix, and if it's the featured instrument / vocal, then yeah, go big. For other stuff, I'm ALWAYS band passing, mono-izing, making things smaller so that they have a space where they can live happily in the mix without having to neuter it later during the mixing process. I like my simple, no jumping thru hoops, faders up sessions to sound like a mix if at all possible. If I can do this BEFORE it gets recorded, I'll always head that direction. I like to commit up front. Choosing the correct mic is a big part of that process. A difficult session for me to mix is one where everything is in stereo and HUUUUGE. Out come the snippers....  I tire quickly of big, bigger, and biggest. I'll happily stand by my statement - sometimes, too big is too big. |
|
|
|
Post by reddirt on Feb 3, 2019 19:15:02 GMT -6
Wasn't criticising Dr Bill, probably exorcising frustrations at mics that deliver less than the in-room sound; given your access to the best, that's probably not an issue you have to face too often.
My point is , with my relatively limited mic locker I'd love a mic that captures the sound and more - I'd have no difficulty reducing its footprint.😄
Cheers, Ross
|
|
|
|
Post by shoe on Feb 3, 2019 20:29:33 GMT -6
No sibilance on me, within the settings of my previous post. I'm an excellent litmus test for this! "Don't worry, be happy" fortune cookie say. (In honor of Chinese New Year) Chris That's good to hear. I can be prone to sibilance myself, so I always worry about that. That's one of the things I love about the REDD.47 preamp and RS124. They seem less likely to emphasize harsh sibilance than some other gear I have. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 3, 2019 22:41:52 GMT -6
Wasn't criticising Dr Bill, probably exorcising frustrations at mics that deliver less than the in-room sound; given your access to the best, that's probably not an issue you have to face too often. My point is , with my relatively limited mic locker I'd love a mic that captures the sound and more - I'd have no difficulty reducing its footprint.😄 Cheers, Ross Ross - no worries! I figured you were reacting to my post, so I answered. Sometimes I'll choose really cheap mics (SM57 / SM7 / Oktava / etc.) over WAY more expensive mics because they are more appropriate for the sound I'm after. And that's the beginning and end of the story for me. What sits in the track nicely and stays out of the way of other stuff. It's an interactive puzzle that's in constant motion, but I have personally found that huge stereo synth pads, wild ping ponging stuff, super wet sounds, crazy huge sounds, etc. are often very difficult to fit into a mix and control without eating up all the space. That's where my comments come from. And just to convey my perspective, it's not just about having access to all the classics - cause unfortunately, I don't. No C12's, U47's, U67's, M49's exist in my mic cabinet - although I'm fairly happy with what's in there. |
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 16,073 
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 4, 2019 0:12:21 GMT -6
I think they got this right: it’s got that boss of the studio vibe and look,which I think will inspire. I think the sonics will be exciting and as said by all in the video when you can tweak it on the fly how can’t that be motivating to the talent when can hear their vocal dialed right in ? Again, for me, this versitility and finesse are clinchers.
You know how some mikes, sound good but not great: bit of a let down, that doesn’t seem to be the TG experience though !?
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Feb 4, 2019 0:17:09 GMT -6
I'm already convinced it's a "modern classic", like the REDD. It's really an amazing accomplishment, for any current manufacturer. Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Feb 4, 2019 5:32:17 GMT -6
So, in the vocal test I had seen a while back online, I noticed quite a bit of sibilance on the male vocals. Are there settings that can de-emphasize sibilance? I think a couple general things one might try to avoid the sibilance is to address the mic slightly off axis, turning it a nudge left or right until you hit the sweet spot. Also, you can try to just back off the mic further. Even if you turn up gain, standing back just allows that sibilance a chance to smooth out itself. The guy in Vintage King video was fairly close. Nothing unusual, but if that were an issue, he could have corrected something. Light de-essering is an easy tool nowadays, and if the tone is great to start with you stand a good chance of getting a sound you like. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 4, 2019 8:23:49 GMT -6
So, in the vocal test I had seen a while back online, I noticed quite a bit of sibilance on the male vocals. Are there settings that can de-emphasize sibilance? I think a couple general things one might try to avoid the sibilance is to address the mic slightly off axis, turning it a nudge left or right until you hit the sweet spot. Also, you can try to just back off the mic further. Even if you turn up gain, standing back just allows that sibilance a chance to smooth out itself. The guy in Vintage King video was fairly close. Nothing unusual, but if that were an issue, he could have corrected something. Light de-essering is an easy tool nowadays, and if the tone is great to start with you stand a good chance of getting a sound you like. I’ve seen that said a bunch...haven’t done a lot of testing myself...but what’s the explanation for this? I just don’t know why this physically would make any difference. |
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Feb 4, 2019 8:47:03 GMT -6
I think a couple general things one might try to avoid the sibilance is to address the mic slightly off axis, turning it a nudge left or right until you hit the sweet spot. Also, you can try to just back off the mic further. Even if you turn up gain, standing back just allows that sibilance a chance to smooth out itself. The guy in Vintage King video was fairly close. Nothing unusual, but if that were an issue, he could have corrected something. Light de-essering is an easy tool nowadays, and if the tone is great to start with you stand a good chance of getting a sound you like. I’ve seen that said a bunch...haven’t done a lot of testing myself...but what’s the explanation for this? I just don’t know why this physically would make any difference. We know that proximity effect can adjust the EQ sound of a mic. So going off axis can be used like subtractive EQ for the high frequency, which is much more directional than lower frequency. Notch a bit of high end by mic placement on tracking and add it back later in EQ with all the shine and less sibilance. That's the theory. |
|
