View Single Post
  #1  
Old 02-18-2018, 12:04 PM
FrankHudson FrankHudson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 4,888
Default Questions about recording and vocal microphones

It's a generally accepted precept about recording and microphones: it's best to use an LDC condenser microphone for recording vocals. Most of the time if anyone asks "what mic for vocals," the discussion will then proceed with suggestions for various LDC condenser models. They're more able to pick up nuances in vocals, more "air" and high frequency response.

OK.

Something else that increasingly occurs in such discussions is how highly desirable room treatment is. That sensitive condenser mic is going to pickup every reflection from any surface and "print" it to your vocal track. And if you have any ambient noise in your recording space, that too will be recorded.

And while there are some great values in lower priced condenser mics, the "industry standard" models can be more than $1,000 pricey.

Now onto my two questions. These are not meant to be contrarian statement of things that I know, disguised as questions. They are real questions, based on things I don't know, but wonder about.

How come when I see professional concert broadcasts or videos where I see inexpensive dynamic mics used in a live setting (perhaps something like the Shure SM58 or Beta58, or the like) do I not invariably notice how much the vocal looses from use of these inexpensive mics of the "wrong" type? Yes, I know there are reasons the SM588 and the like are used for live performance. Yes, I know there are good sound techs working the board who will have some outboard gear, and in the case of DVDs there may even be a good deal of considered post-processing, but this continues to puzzle me.

Next question. It may be poorly-calibrated ears, but I notice dynamic mics lower sensitivity makes them less sensitive to room sound, and they often do not pickup undesirable off-mic noises or high levels of "bleed" where a condenser would. Would these side-effects of using a less-expensive dynamic mic make them even more cost-effective for those who are recording in less than ideal environments, such as are common for home recordists?

As I said, these are questions I don't know the answer to. In practice, I'm using a dynamic Electro-Voice RE20 mic in my "Studio B" (a typical "home office") for voice, including my singing. Before the RE20, I used a Shure SM58 that I used for live performances. My singing has issues that no microphone will solve, but as a practical matter, the RE20 doesn't pickup the fans of the three computers in the room or most of the routine noises of other people in the house or outside the window or the HVAC vent about a yard from it. Some of my "vocals" are spoken word, and the EV20 is one of the "industry standard" choices for that, but I don't dislike what it does to my singing voice.

In summary: Seems like good, even excellent, vocal recordings can be made with dynamic mics. Roughly speaking, dynamic mics are not more expensive. Common issues with home recordings are mitigated by the nature of dynamic mics. So why do I rarely see dynamic mics recommended as candidates to consider for home recordings of vocals?
__________________
-----------------------------------
Creator of The Parlando Project

Guitars: 20th Century Seagull S6-12, S6 Folk, Seagull M6; '00 Guild JF30-12, '01 Martin 00-15, '16 Martin 000-17, '07 Parkwood PW510, Epiphone Biscuit resonator, Merlin Dulcimer, and various electric guitars, basses....
Reply With Quote