used cheap condenser mics

[el_kabong]

Originally Posted by Mr Fixit eh

I've found it very helpful to have found a person who specializes in sound production and studio recording - and pick his brain. He has been a wealth of info about mics for me.

Good advice there. As it happens, my "guru" used to be lead engineer at Earl Scruggs studio in Nashville and seems to know just a little bit about acoustic guitar recording. Anyway, he steered me to a used Shure KSM109, which is - more-or-less a no-frills, stripped-down version of the KSM137 or KSM141...with no hi-pass or Omni capacity. The frequency response is still very similar...very nice mic and often available on eBay in the range of $100-$120. I think I got mine for $90.

[YamaYairi]

I'm just curious if anyone listened to the 2 recordings I posted comparing the MXL V67G and the AKG C414? I'd like to get some feedback.

[el_kabong]

YY - I just took a listen. While I do prefer the AKG track, I'd personally not value the improvement at $900 or whatever the pricing difference might be. I'm sure that, for many of us, the MXL's would be perfectly adequate. Often as not, I tend to suspect that most "casual" listeners wouldn't be able (or care) to differentiate issues of transparency or transient response and, if anything at all, might tend to focus on voicing/frequency response issues. The AKG seems warmer to me, for instance, but as others have noted in other threads, issues such as your preamp, DAC, room treatment, and, of course, the all-important issue of mic placement often trump or strongly influence these tonal differences.

I do have my preferences, of course, but am not convinced that really matters overly much. One of the most impressive vocal mic's I've heard recently is the AT5040 (sample here), but you really should expect a lot from a $3000 mic, shouldn't you? I'm sure it would sound great on acoustic guitar...$2500 better than the AT4047 or Shure KSM32? Not for me...unless you happen to have one lying around and are willing to lend it out.

[YamaYairi]

Originally Posted by el_kabong

YY - I just took a listen. While I do prefer the AKG track, I'd personally not value the improvement at $900 or whatever the pricing difference might be. I'm sure that, for many of us, the MXL's would be perfectly adequate. Often as not, I tend to suspect that most "casual" listeners wouldn't be able (or care) to differentiate issues of transparency or transient response and, if anything at all, might tend to focus on voicing/frequency response issues. The AKG seems warmer to me, for instance, but as others have noted in other threads, issues such as your preamp, DAC, room treatment, and, of course, the all-important issue of mic placement often trump or strongly influence these tonal differences.

I do have my preferences, of course, but am not convinced that really matters overly much. One of the most impressive vocal mic's I've heard recently is the AT5040 (sample here), but you really should expect a lot from a $3000 mic, shouldn't you? I'm sure it would sound great on acoustic guitar...$2500 better than the AT4047 or Shure KSM32? Not for me...unless you happen to have one lying around and are willing to lend it out.

Thanks for the thoughtful observations. On those recordings with that mic placement I was able to hear a difference but I really couldn't decide which I liked better. I went on to make a few close mic'ed recordings with the MXR, that I was really happy with. If anyone wants to hear them they are here:
https://soundcloud.com/wbendler/norm...nd-light-cover

And here:
https://soundcloud.com/wbendler/pete...mbleweed-cover

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by YamaYairi

Thanks for the thoughtful observations. On those recordings with that mic placement I was able to hear a difference but I really couldn't decide which I liked better. I went on to make a few close mic'ed recordings with the MXR, that I was really happy with. If anyone wants to hear them they are here:
https://soundcloud.com/wbendler/norm...nd-light-cover

And here:
https://soundcloud.com/wbendler/pete...mbleweed-cover

I like how the MXL sounds in these recordings but I'm listening through my ear buds plugged in my phone, certainly poor play back equipment. Nice playing and singing too.

[YamaYairi]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

I like how the MXL sounds in these recordings but I'm listening through my ear buds plugged in my phone, certainly poor play back equipment. Nice playing and singing too.

Thanks! Maybe you can listen later at home.

[RedJoker]

Wow. No sooner did I start this thread and a friend gave me a set of Behringer C2 mics. I guess free is a specific type of cheap! I will certain enjoy playing around with this stuff.

[RedJoker]

I haven't played with these much but I can't say I like them yet. I have a couple of other free / cheap dynamics that I think I like better. Way too soon to really know but just my first impression. I'm recording in my untreated living room at the moment so maybe I don't like that the C2s are picking up more than the dynamics were...

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

I haven't played with these much but I can't say I like them yet. I have a couple of other free / cheap dynamics that I think I like better. Way too soon to really know but just my first impression. I'm recording in my untreated living room at the moment so maybe I don't like that the C2s are picking up more than the dynamics were...

At the risk of derailing another thread I'd like to point out that the internet myth about dynamics "picking up less room" than condensers is just that, a myth.

Microphone pickup pattern, source volume, and mic position all impact how much room gets into the recording. Two cardioids with reasonably similar patterns, one dynamic and one condenser, will sound remarkably similar if the recorded levels are matched.

After starting this discussion (and being called names) a dozen times or so, I've come to the conclusion that most folks position dynamics very differently from condensers due to the difference in sensitivity, instead of adjusting the total system sensitivity using the preamp gain control.

I tested this very carefully a couple of times, and consulted with some folks who know a lot about the way mics work, but people still call me names <grin>.

Here's a comparison of an SM58 vs KSM141, same source, same mic position, level matched:

KSM141
SM58

I certainly don't think these sound the same, but I think they sound a lot more similar than most people report their dynamic vs condenser experiments sound.

Fran

[RedJoker]

I agree Fran. However, my test was far from legit, it was me pulling out my mic stand, puttingthe mics on it, recording, playing back and sayiny "Meh". I'm sure my highly trained and calibrated ears and my minutes of extensive recording experience were able to give a truely objective comparison. (That last sentence was sarcasm, indicating that my comments and opinions should be completely disregarded.)

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

I haven't played with these much but I can't say I like them yet. I have a couple of other free / cheap dynamics that I think I like better. Way too soon to really know but just my first impression. I'm recording in my untreated living room at the moment so maybe I don't like that the C2s are picking up more than the dynamics were...

RJ, not all cardioids are the same. Mic patterns vary on a spectrum; from omni on one end to figure of eight on the other. In the middle are the various cardioids; wide, normal, hyper and super. As they progress in that order, the "tail" off the back grows bigger and eventually becomes the rear lobe of a figure of eight.

The wider the pattern, the more room (or anything) will be heard. If you have time, start comparing polar plots of different mics to get a sense of how wide or narrow they are. (factor in that manufacturers sometimes make plots and curves look prettier than they really are) and you'll begin to get a handle on it. The TLM 103, for example is a wide cardioid relative to a lot of other mics. As a result, if you adjust gain of pre maps so that a TLM 103 and a SM57 are giving you pretty much the same meter readings, you'll find you need a lot more preamp gain in the SM57 preamp. (more noise)

Having made that adjustment, you're more likely to hear more room in the TLM 103, partially because of the wider cardioid pattern but also because the TLM 103 has a much wider frequency response.

A condenser mic normally has a wider bandwidth than a dynamic because it doesn't have to move a wire coil attached to its diaphragm the way a dynamic does. The mass of the coil damps (not dampens) the diaphragm of a dynamic and keeps it from tracking the high frequency transients.

That's part of why dynamic mics aren't as sensitive as condenser mics. They simply can not transduce those upper frequencies. The frequencies get to the diaphragm, but the diaphragm can't wiggle fast enough to turn the motion into electricity.

The more live the acoustic environment (hard, reflective surfaces) the more the high frequencies bounce around. The condenser mic will transduce those high frequencies, so you hear more room bounce. The dynamic will not, per the above, so less roomy sound.

I'm pretty sure that's what you're hearing in your C2s. That's why I like hyper and super cardioid patterns. They don't hear as much room as regular cardioids.

Fran's correct that mics of similar polar patterns will respond similarly, but even if the polar patterns are identical, the added high frequency response of condenser mics will allow condensers to hear more high frequencies than dynamics. This may not be as noticeable in a recording studio where the acoustical environment is well-controlled, but in very live, reflective environments like your living room, the differences will be more apparent.

I once had a job of choosing new mics for a radio station. They had been using SM7s. I was very taken by the TLM103 at the time. The news booth had glass on three sides looking into other studios. The TLM 103 was a nightmare because it was too wide and also captured too many high frequencies. I could hear the bearings in the cart machines! And, yes, the preamps were adjusted to account for the more sensitive TLM 103. The reflective glass bounced the voice all over the place (think shower stall). The SM7 ruled in that room because it didn't hear the high frequencies.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

The mass of the coil damps (not dampens) the diaphragm of a dynamic and keeps it from tracking the high frequency transients.

Ty Ford

This is a favorite pet peeve of mine. I worked about 10 yrs in an acoustic test lab and we all cringed when folks said "dampened".

And thanks for the advice. I have much to learn and it's great to now have a variety of options, cheap though they may be. Now if I can just get my talent up to be worth recording...