1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Cheapish mic for recording didge?

Discussion in 'Recording' started by TwelveGauge-GT, Oct 3, 2007.

  1. Hi there,
    I was just wandering what a good mic would be for didgeridoo recording?
    It needs to have crystal, almost shrill highs for the screeches.
    I have been using an SM57 so far which isn't bad but it doesn't really have the bite that I need; too round sounding.
    Budget of around £150, under if possible.

    BROKENBONES Active Member

    Save up a bit more and get an RE20. That's what I used when I recorded Didge a few years back.
    Condenser mics sucked . Use Dynamics near the soundhole but not pointed at it .
  3. zemlin

    zemlin Well-Known Member

    If I was digging around my kit for a dynamic with clear top-end, I'd reach for a Heil PR20. The other alternative would be a smooth, clear condensor - AKG Blue Lines are good for that, but not within your budget unless you buy used.
  4. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    good question.

    the whole reason I got into sound reinforcement and recording was because of a didgeridoo!

    i was in the same exact position as you; i needed to mic up the didg. One mic lead to another, and another, and then a mixer, speakers, rack gear, etc etc, hah!

    anyways... i've had success with the AKG c1000s. you'll want to put some compression (and/or a limiter) on it to surpress the really loud toots and yelps, but the c1000s is a mic that i've had success with in the studio and live.

    otherwise you could go with the regularass SM57 and it'd be fine i'm sure.

    good luck
  5. Thanks a lot for your replys. That AKG C1000 S looks good, what I was after. The others are a bit out of my league!
    I'll try and demo an C1000S, see how it sounds. Have you compared it to an SM57, by any chance?
  6. zemlin

    zemlin Well-Known Member

    The C1000 is pretty bright - common as a rental mic though - it would be worth trying to rent one before you commit.

    Never recorded a didge myself though, so I'm just guessing.
  7. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    yeah i've used the sm57. for "just fooling around at home" use its perfeclty adequate.

    if you're looking to record or get some sort of higher-quality sound, you'll need a condensor mic; especially since a lot of the didgeridoo sounds are subtle.

    c1000s is battery powered, too which means you can just get an XLR->1/4" adapter and plug right into an amp -- without any phantom power source (like a mixer or dedicated phantom box)

    sm57 is dynamic and will resist feeding back (especially on stage or in very small rooms) as compared to something like the c1000s. again, you'll lose some of the finer details if you use any sort of dynamic mic.

    check out the c1000s ... find a music retailer and get them to agree to a 7-15 day return policy (since it'll be for an acoustic instrument and NOT vocals this shouldnt be too tough).

    if you dont like it, return it. if you do like it, thank me after you get it. ;)
  8. How are the C1000s for vocals anyway?
    Better than the Peavey PVM22 that I have at the moment, I'm guessing..

    Can you run the C1000S with phantom power, instead of a battery?
    It will be going into a Yamaha AW1600 at home.

    Thanks again.
  9. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    the c1000s is ok for vocals. the high end is a bit shrill and harsh... i'd certainly recommend a dedicated vocal mic if that's what you want to do.

    don't get me wrong, the c1000s is a VERY versitile mic. they come with some neat goodies, including a Presence Boost adapter (which boosts 3-8k) to be used for vocals. it'll work better than most dynamic microphones for vocals, but it's "different".

    YES, it is definietly operateable via regularass Phantom Power. the battery compartment is in case you dont have a power source or you want to go mobile with the mic. Also has an on/off switch so you dont waste the battery if no phantom power is being supplied.

    doesnt the AW1600 have phantom power??

    i actually have an extra c1000s for sale -- i just upgraded my whole array of condensor mics. $125 + shipping. i can supply photos, demos, etc. shoot a PM if interested.

    nice versitile mic!
  10. Yes the AW does have phantom power, but only on 4 inputs at a time. You can have phantom on 1-4 or 5-8, or both (or neither like I have at the moment).

    Would the SM57s get damaged if they have phantom power going to them as well?

    But yeah, sounds like a good enough mic for what I need.

    Sorry, I Won't be albe to buy yours. I live in England..

    The AKG mics seem to be pretty good value. How do you rate the others? (C 2000 R, Perception 200, etc).

    How does the C1000S compare to the Rode NT1-A or NT3? Because they are in my price range as well.
  11. Boswell

    Boswell Moderator Distinguished Member

    I wouldn't use the C1000 for didgeridoo. A Rode NT5 would be hard to beat for this application for the sort of money you are talking about at UK prices.

    No. Dynamic mics are designed to cope with phantom power as long as you use correctly wired XLR-XLR microphone cables.
  12. Thanks for that.
    How versatile is the NT5 for other applications?
    Does it have the high-end that I need?
    It does look like quite a good deal, comes out at about £110 over here; compared to the £80-90 for the C1000S.
    Has anyone compared the two?
  13. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    the nt5 will probably give you a "fuller" sound.

    the c1000s is only as expensive as it is because of it's unique battery setup and pickup pattern adapters. the sound is comparable to a $100 mic, but with the adapters and battery features, they can jack the price up another $100.

    the nt5 doesnt have the neat bells and whistles, so you get a better sound for (roughly) the same price.

    it depends if you're looking for versitility or sound quality.

    the c1000s is a mic i used for didg and just got real comfortable with. if it aint broke, dont fix it they say.
  14. Boswell

    Boswell Moderator Distinguished Member

    It may be just a personal thing, but I happen not to like the sound of a C1000, for instruments, vocals, drum OH, cabs or everything I've tried it on. The NT5, on the other hand, is a real workhorse, and will account well for itself on just about anything except guitar cabinets, provided you don't need LF rolloff, pad switch or battery operation.

    A matched pair of NT5s, or their fixed-format version the NT4, has to be one pf the best value microphone sets around. The NT4 additionally has the flexibility of PP or battery operation, and I have done surprisingly good field recordings of a didgeridoo using just an NT4 and a minidisk recorder.
  15. RecordingNewb

    RecordingNewb Active Member

    i've been reading up on the nt5 because i'm considering a pair myself, and one of the reviews i read said that there's about a 3db roll-off starting at about 1.5kHz. the reviewer categorized the nt5 as one of the darker small-diaphragm mics he's tested. i haven't used the C1000s, but if you're looking for a bright response, based at least on what i've read there might be better options for you than the nt5.
  16. Boswell

    Boswell Moderator Distinguished Member

    Which review was that, exactly? Have you looked at the response curves, where the roll-off starts at around 12.5KHz? The C1000 could well appear to be brighter because its top end is exaggerated, but that is what is mainly responsible for its uncomfortable sound on a lot of sources.
  17. RecordingNewb

    RecordingNewb Active Member

    my bad, boswell, i mistyped. i meant 15kHz. i can't remember the name or source of the review as i read it a month or two ago. i found it by googling "rode nt5". the specific review i read compared it to the Neumann km184.

Share This Page