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

Diaphram "Safety"

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Mindsender, Jun 18, 2001.

  1. Mindsender

    Mindsender Guest

    Well.. that sounds a little off topic.
    But it isn't. I've read their is some degree of consideration that has to be paid to the sensitivity of large diaphram mikes to high levels of sound.
    Is this true? If so, what are good practices? I have my new M149 in the same room I play "powerful" music. Mixes, rock guitar, etc. Any problem? If so, I would imagine whether the power was on or off would make no difference. Also, can I use this mike to pick up the sound of a loud guitar amp. I see a lot of recommendations for the Shure 57 etc. but considering the clarity and beauty of this mike, I'd at least like to try it if it can handle those pressures.
    DISMAY: Now open your mind for this one.. I find that the only "OPEN" sound on the M149 is full rolloff to 160, and the figure 8 pattern. The Omni is also open, but without presence and a sense of character for vocals. Even placing the rolloff one notch down (half-way) between 160-80 detents, introduces a slight "blanketing" in the direction of warmth, yet not nearly so effective as simply getting a little closer than normal to pickup proximity, while remaining more clear (and right sounding).
    In this position, (figure8,full rolloff)the sound is perfectly "untarnished" to my ear (unblanketed), and the proximity effect is greatly reduced, letting you get as close as 4-5 inches as you sing for soft intimate passages, or when you want to pick up a little more warmth from the now "less deep" proximity field. It gives you a lot of subtle field varaiations to work with as a singer looking to find different sweet spots for hard highs, soft highs, low intimacy etc. And, interestingly (and thankfully) from an engineering stand point, this mike seems almost self-compressed compared to my Gefell MU70.
    While I know I can record with less rolloff, then use eq later to the same end, that seems a worse solution. Especially after a lesson on the somewhat less than benign effects of EQ from Fletcher in previous post (I know, it's a very useful tool in the right amounts, but still better not to play with those numbers any more than absolutely necessary, if I read you right, Fletcher). However, even though it sounds wonderful to my inexperienced engineering ear, I fear that I may be losing too much of the signal, and live to regret it. Any suggestions. Also, without intending any arrogance, if you have a knee-jerk to standard principals here(and I could see where it wouldn't be hard here), I suggest you actually try this full rollof/figure8 setting before relying wholely on general principal. I read your comments on the M149 at the Mercenary site, Fletcher (after I had purchased), so assume your hands on has already brought you to your own opinions. Appreciate all your good help. (Loved your story on how to get paid. Some very deserving guys have never had to deal with consequence. It's nice to see justice have it's day, without going to jail)
    Thanks for your advice, and comments on other issues preceeding. All the best. Paul
     
  2. dbock

    dbock Guest

    If it's really powerfull send some here to California, we need more power.
    If your mic is off and you play loud music you will not hurt it. If it is on you will not hurt it. If you shoot it with a gun you will hurt it. If you drop it you might hurt it. If your drummer throws it he probably will hurt it. If you stick it in a kick drum you won't hurt it.
    It's not surprising to me that you arn't getting the sound you expected out of a particular mic, you'll just have to use it and many others to get a feel for what's going to work for you.
    DB
     

Share This Page