Rode NTZ is great as are some of the Blue microphones. AKG C1000, C2000, C3000 all work great as do the 4050's from Audio Technica.

Best to try before you buy if you can since microphones are all different in character and you may have to try a dozen or so microphones before you find one that works for this vocalist.

Yes, the 4050 - you'd have a hard time going wrong with this one. Or the 4040 for that matter. Of course, the FET versions - 4033/4047 are also rather warm and smooth sounding as well. I personally would shy away from the AKGs - their 1000,2000,3000,4000 and Solid Tube all leave a bit to be desired IMO. The 414 is definitely not smooth and warm. I consider it to be clinical and accurate.

The Blues are also excellent choices for budget mics. The Baby Bottle is a great mic especially for the money. Of course, there's the ubiquitous SP C1 and the new favorite around here (which I've yet to hear, so I can't advise) KEL mics.

Some of the GT tube mics are also nice sounding devices. Their solid state mics however would lack that "warmth" still and have a bit of a peak in the higher frequencies.

Good luck.
J.

The problem you may be having is that you are trying to use a condenser mic. A ribbon or even better, a stereo ribbon (SF24) will do the trick on taming a female voice into a purr.

Checkout and listen to the Wailing Jenny's demo on the Royer Website, this may answer all your questions in a few seconds.

http://www.royerlabs.com/wailin_jennys.html

http://www.royerlabs.com/audio/democd_track11c.mp3

I'd check out the above link as well.

The AT4060 would be pretty good too -smooth yet articulate. Don't get too close without carefully monitoring the bottom end!

John

You will all probably bash on me but... :oops:

I have had some excellent results using a cheap @ss MXL V69 (mogami) on female vocalists. Actually, I will seldom even need to use any eq on the track. This mic has me totally blown away for female vox.

flaming begins now... :(

WHAT THE...:twisted: MXL?

You're not the first person I've come across to express that opinion, so I think anyone who wants to flame you should probably listen to one first 8-)

John

PS I own a Behringer B2 Pro :oops: Oh the shame!

Thanks guys for all the input. My decision now will be more informed but because of all the recommendations it will not be an easy one. Some of the mics I’ve never heard of and others are very tempting but Dave and John’s link to the Royer page convinced me that I need a ribbon. The AT 4050 for my wife’s voice is a real temptation because the way Cucco spoke of how well the 4040 works on violin. This mic could serve 2 purposes. I’ve never heard the Blue mics but they sure are tempting.
No, I’ve made my decision, the Royer SF-24 is the mic I need. Now I check for a price and find they are $3600. How about a ribbon for around $1000? Any recommendation?
From the little reading I’ve just done it sounds like most ribbon don’t like phantom power which worries me. It would be very easy for me to accidentally send phantom power to one of them. Maybe I should stick to a condenser mic. You know thing would be a lot easier if money grew on trees!

sseverett wrote: I’ve never heard the Blue mics but they sure are tempting.

If budget is a concern, you might want to audition a Lollipop capsule on a C451/452 or a C480 body.

How about a ribbon for around $1000? Any recommendation?

How much abuse will it get? AEA R84 comes to mind...

From the little reading I’ve just done it sounds like most ribbon don’t like phantom power which worries me. It would be very easy for me to accidentally send phantom power to one of them.

The only real concern is a defective phantom supply or a miswired cable and even that may be less of a problem than what you have read.

DavidSpearritt wrote: The problem you may be having is that you are trying to use a condenser mic. A ribbon or even better, a stereo ribbon (SF24) will do the trick on taming a female voice into a purr.

While I agree most of the time I was recently surprised by a powerhouse mezzo that sounded better with TLM193s than my SF12. And this is a voice that can shred metal at fifty feet!

Rich

I'll toss another mic into the works. It's not a large diaphram, but it works great for many female vocalists. Sennheiser 865.

Sennheiser 865? MXL V69? AEA R84? TLM193?
Now, let me make sure I understand this correctly. I could use a very expensive mic or a cheap one. I could use a middle priced mic. I could use a condenser or ribbon or maybe something else. I see tubes, FET, solid state, and no powered mics are all recommended. Could it be that the mic doesn’t matter? Could it be that my miking technic just suck and I’ll never get a good recording? Is it possible that a Royer SF-24 would sound like a AKG 1000s in my hands? Maybe it's not my miking technic and maybe it's my room! Could it be everything I record will sound like a sure 57 until I change my room? No, No, No! It has to be my preamp. Great preamp, great recording. That’s the next puzzle piece I need.
I belong to a small Irish band and I do all of our recording. I do it in my home. I record no one else except our band. I’ve been recording our group for about 6 years and have come to some conclusion. I have not set the standard, (you pro’s have), but I must try to match that standard if I’m to have something I am proud of and sign my name to. Acoustic instruments are much different than electronic ones. A $200 mic might work on an electric guitar or keyboard but forget about it on an acoustical instrument. It is way too noisy. Set it close to keep the noise down and it become brittle and bright. Same for preamps. No, if you want to meet the standard recording acoustic instruments you must have good equipment. Have you listened to the orchestra recording on the Royer page? That wasn’t recorded with a Rode II through a ART preamp into a Mackie mixer and on to the computer. Those recordings are works of art. I have all kinds’ of stuff that I’ve bought to cheaply solve a problem only to find out it was just cheap. The rest of the world must already know this because no one will give me anything for the stuff. Go to E-bay and try to get a good deal on a Hardy M-1 or a Neumann mic. Well, you might as well buy new. You don’t save enough to take the chance.
The recommendations for ribbon mics from Royer and AEA make a lot of sense. I am having the troubles, which these people say I will have, with condenser mics. I will save up my money until I can afford one of them.
Thanks a lot guys; all of you!
steve

I think you are having a combination of information overload and paralysis by analysis!

A ribbon would likely work well, and SF12 prices on Ebay are quite low now with the SF24 attracting folks. However, I must say that wtih any normal (non-active) ribbon you cannot skimp on the micpre. You need to have AT LEAST 55dB of lownoise gain. The input impedance needs to be at least 10 times the value of the nominal mic impedance or you won't have all the LF the mic is capable of.

If you don't have $2000-3000 to spend I suggest looking for a Shure SM80-- the omni version of the 81, and the darkest, warmest FET mic I ever had. Not easy to find but you would not have many of the headaches you are slogging through. If you'd like I could ask the guy I sold mine to if he'd like to part with them.

Rich

good lord, sseveret, no offense, but you're a wreck! :cry:

Seriously, you're way too tough on yourself. It's NOT about exotic mics or preamps, no matter what you may read here or elsewhere, and it's probably got even less to do with YOUR skill. There's 100's, if not 1000's of reasons why you're not getting the sound you want. Yet.

First of all, take a deep breath, relax, open your mind (and your ears).

Then remember that it's the talent and the material in front of the microphone first; then the room, and (finally) the gear itself. I've heard some amazing A/B comparisons over the years....only instead of the difference being the gear, the difference was the performer (or the instrument) and the room.

Just this past weekend I recorded a live band with three singers; all of them singing into the same mics (SM58's), in the same general stage area, into the same mic cables, snake & preamps, to Firewire to HD, all at 24/96. Two of them were so-so in terms of sound. They could have been anyone singing; totally nondescript, totally pedestrian sound quality. Their leader/drummer, however, had the finest "whiskey voice" rasp and delivery I've heard north of the Mason-Dixon line. The guy just SMOKED the tunes that he sang. No one else in the mix came close. (I could've put a Radio Shack Kareoke mic on this guy and still gotten an interesting sound.) Sure, a $2k mic and equally expensive pre would put him over the top and into orbit, but that's not the point, and not always necessary for a good "sound." I'll be happy to send you a clip of this guy when the mix is complete.

You may need to expand your circle of friends, musicians and venues; I assue you that the more you record and experiment, the more you'll learn and enjoy yourself.

"And stop all this I'm not worthy this, and I'm not worthy that..."

Thanks for the replies guys!
It’s not that I see myself incapable it is more a feeling of frustration. You would think that anyone who records would want to record well. The more I read the wider the path grows to good recordings. My experience is that there are many ways to make a less that good recording and a few ways to make a great recording. Maybe my mistake was not to ask the question correctly. Instead of asking a general question I should have stated my exact use for a female vocal mic. Maybe that would have narrowed down the recommendations.
JoeH, I would love to hear your recording. Please send it to me when you have it mixed. I think you are exactly right in what you say that a great recording starts with great musicians. Although we are not great, I think we perform well and I did a decent job or recording the music. If anyone wants to hear a track I have it in mp3 and wave and all you would have to do is tell me how to get it to you. I wish to get better and that is why I am here. This is not school; when I make a mistake I don’t get a red X; I write another check. I think I could do some really good recording with about $10,000 worth of equipment. The problem is I will spend $25,000 to get the right $10,000 worth of equipment. I’m sure if I could study under some of you guys for a few months I would know exactly what I need. Because I don’t have that experience I must learn as I go. If I’m to spend $1500 on a Royer R-122 if must be the right mic.
Rich, is the SM80 a ribbon mic? If it is I would be interested.
Stick with me guys. I get through this and be alright
steve

sseverett wrote: Rich, is the SM80 a ribbon mic? If it is I would be interested.

The SM80 was made by Shure as the omni version of the very popular SM81 condenser. It is very flat in response, resembling a Schoeps MK2. Amazing value but it was NOT popular, and later Shure only offered the omni capsule which is no longer made. Takes 12-48vDC phantom.

Obviously not a ribbon, but given your budget and application I think it is a better choice-- you don't need a great micpre, and you don't have the proximity effect of a ribbon. Put a ribbon too close to a singer and it is not hard to "fry" the ribbon with wind.

Rich

Rich, I really loved those SM80's. (I installed a lot of them over the years in various locations, but unwisely didn't keep a pair for myself when they were available....)

I've got a pair of SM81's (The cardioids), but I'd still like to get my hands on a pair of SM80's, at least the capsules. Maybe I should keep trolling Ebay.......

JoeH wrote: I've got a pair of SM81's (The cardioids), but I'd still like to get my hands on a pair of SM80's, at least the capsules. Maybe I should keep trolling Ebay.......

or call Phil McClelland-- he bought mine.

Rich

You say you're in an Irish band. Do you live in Ireland? If you're anywhere near Dublin I would be more than happy to give you any assitance I could. I don't have the level of skill and experience of others here, but I think I can solve most problems. It's not really THAT difficult to break through that barrier. It's just a case of a lot of small things lining up. Then the fun starts!

John

Good idea Rich, but I doubt Phil will want to sell his; most of the stuff he's got at Curtis is there forever. (Well, I have two of his old Beta video decks he doesn't want anymore...hehehe)

We used to used the SM80's a long time ago above the main performance space in what is now Field auditorium (he's had a pair of Schoeps for quite some a few years now.) I think the SM80's are part of his live rig, when they do remotes.

Might be worth a call, though...... 8-)

Thanks for the input.
John I do not live in Ireland (South Central Pa. Hollidaysburg, Pa. USA) but if I did I sure would take you up on your offer. I think you are right, lining up all the small things, and that is what I’m hoping to do.
From the talk about the Sure SM80’s maybe I need to reask my question instead of just buying an R-122. My recording doesn’t have all the variables that you guys deal with. I only record one band (fiddle, keyboard, piano accordion, and bodhran or a stand up bass). I only record in one room (16X20 that I’m still working on the acoustics). I only record one female vocal (my wife). I record with 2 AKG 1000s in an XY stereo setup. I place the accordion on one side, the keyboard speaker on the other side and the fiddle in the middle. I either play the bodhran or bass to one side of the fiddle. I’ve tried a lot of other setups but this seems to work best for me. I would like to get a clearer, fuller, sound. What mic or mics would you guys recommend?
Thanks,
steve

Steve
Have you ever recorded the different parts one-by-one? I'm not talking about muti-tracking (although it might be fun to experiment with this), but just play around with the mics to see what you can manage in your room with each instrument? The bodhran can be a nightmare to record well -as I'm sure you know!

In my experience, you can get completely different results with ORTF. I like to put on a pair of headphones and take a mic in each hand and move them all over the place. Sometimes I find that any problems with standing waves can be partially solved by moving the mics away from each other (not just at the 'standard' distances). Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the standing wave issues are different depending on where the mic is placed, so they're different for each mic. While they don't cancel each other out, they won't be as obvious. In XY you'll hear the same frequency anomalies with each mic. The difference in timing cues using ORTF will also help as they are not dependent on the type of mic. I don't know about others on the site, but I rarely use XY unless the room is absolutely perfect, or if I'm outdoors. For a setup like yours, I would also experiment with having the mics almost parallel. It can give hideous results, but sometimes it can work very well. It probably has something to do with the fact that some of the sounds are on-axis, but it also depends on the off axis response of your mics, talking of which, the AT-4033 comes to mind.

BTW, have you considered the AKG C414 XLS? It might be a good mic for your situation. I'm not too familiar with the older models, but the new one has nice transparency, and a much nicer high end than the C1000. Some say the highs are smoother than the ULS version, but I can't comment on this as I haven't used a ULS for some time. The newer models have even more flixibility.

John

John
I do record the individual instruments at the same time I’m recording the stereo track. I’ve add K&K Sound systems to the instruments for live performances (too many problems with mics) and I also use these tracks when I’m mixing. I use a pickup on the bodhran and mixed it with a mic. This is the sound I use but not happy with. The bass has a combination pickup/mic that works very well. The violin pickup sounds terrible. The mic on the violin sounds terrible (Rode NT2 up close, low at the outside corner). The accordion is so loud that I must keep all micing close or the track has too much accordion. There is an internal mic in the accordion and it works fine for an accordion track. I take a separate output from the piano sound module and make a piano track. When I mix, and need a little more sound from one instrument, I pan that instrument track to match the stereo track and add a little volume.
Are you saying that the AKG C414 is not going to sound like the other condenser mics I’m using? If I spend $900 on the AKG I will have saved almost half of what the Royer cost but I do not have a ribbon mic. Is this the one mic I need for the vocal in my band? I have not noticed a lack in the high end with what I’m using I missing a nice full low end.
The band is getting together again this coming week to rerecord a tune. I will try the ORTF setup and I will also try a dynamic mic on the violin. After talking to you guys I realize the best mic is not the most expensive mic but the mic that works. Maybe the Sure SM57 will reject more that the Rode cardioid pattern and I can give it a little more distance.
Thanks for the help,
steve

I was really just mentioning the 414 as an improvement over the C1000. I was probably over-simplifying the issue. It's just that the C1000 can be an awful mic in many situations, although I wouldn't go along with the cult of C1000 hatred.

The bodhran even without the other instruments is a challenge. While I have great admiration for the Wailin' Jennies (or however they spell it) using the Royers, the bodhran doesn't sound like any bodhran I've ever heard, but maybe their instrument is different from the type I'm familiar with. I think a 414 would be a good idea for that, or maybe a U87 (but the 87 would not be worth the money for this application). It's difficult to balance that 'clack' with just enough bass response. Have you tried your Rode on the Bodhran? That just might work really well.

Have you tried a bridge pickup on the violin? It can work satisfactorily for this type of music, and provide more separation so the accordion won't be such problem. You might also consider some sort of arrangement with baffles so you don't have too much spill -a bit like a rock band playing live in the studio. You might also try a dynamic on the singer -it just might work. If you use a condenser on the singer, it could be a good idea to try some acoustic isolation, and place something that absorbs sound behind her.

If you were to use a stereo ribbon, you would need to arrange everyone around the mic and balance things that way. You'd also need a pretty decent room. The wailin' Jennies demo might give the impression that everything is simpler than it actually is. Maybe in your circumstances things might not work so well. OTOH it might give wonderful results. I think the most important thing you should do is experiment with positioning, and don't try and have everyone stand in the same position they would occupy on stage.

I would try out lots of stuff like this before commiting to new mics.

John

I have an old RCA D77 and that is the best mic that I have used for female vox- works everytime, makes the voice rich and creamy and tames the shrill out of the high end- now AEA makes a ribbon for around $1000, the AEA R84-I'd say that is worth a look

(dead link removed)

lately I've been using the rode k2 on female vox as my RCa is indisposed (needs a new cable at least) I put it in omni and its a very useable sound- not quite like the RCA but it works well. One of those can be had for about $600- I got two for $550 ea and they are great for percussion too! (actually that's why I got two, to record congas, etc) One of these might work for you as well. 8)

I do want to try everything possible to get a good sound before laying down a lot of money for a mic. I was hoping to get the sound I wanted by buying a ribbon. Maybe things are just not that easy. Over the next few weeks I will try all kinds of different mic positions and experiment with the mics I have. Thanks for the suggestion.
I’ve found the bodhran impossible. Rarely do I ever hear it done right in a recording and only once done right in a concert. I’ve tried the Audix D4, Sure SM57, AKG, and the Rode with no success. I’ve tried micing the back, the front, and at an angle to both front and rear. I’ve tried close and at a distance but I have not yet found the sound. The fiddle is another one I haven’t got right yet. Along with micing I’ve also tried bridge pickups and found them way too bright. I finally settled on placing one pickup near the f hole and another low on the outside of the top. This setup works for live playing but is too bright and thin for recording. I’ve been using the Rode’s on vocal through a good tube preamp but I would still like to warm it up and fill out the sound some more. I have a lot of sound absorbers in the room so I will put some close behind my wife when she sing and try that.
I’ve looked at the AEA mics. How do you guys think they compare with Royer? I really like the electronics the Royer adds to the R-122 so that I’m not trying to match impedance or pushing my preamp into distortion. I’ve not tried the Rode K2 nor even looked at it. Does it sound that much different than the NT2?
Thanks for the help,
steve

Steve, I like most the JoeH's post, the first one. It's not that MUCH a
matter of the mic choise, it seems. Could be placement or something
else...
One thing that comes to mind - why don't you book a short session
in a decent studio and try with your wife all kind of mics/pres. This
way you can have a better idea what you want. Maybe a session with
whole band as a matter of fact.

My AT4047 is one of my favorite mics overall, but especially on female vox. It's like it never lets me down in that application. Some mics absolutely bite on females. I try a lot of stuff but it seems like I always go back to the trusty ol' 4047. :D

So you're after a good female vocal mic?

I just checked my mic connections...they're all female 8)

Aaaaaanyywayyyy...
To get a good recording I think this is a good order of importance to follow, but it's only my opinion:

1-the song
2-the performer
3-the room
4-the engineer

now we get into minor details, in my opinion

5-the pre
6-the mic,
8-the software, computer, monitors, blah blah blah
9-Canadian beer

Oh yeah, and I'm fully prepared to get flamed for suggesting that big buck monitors are not significant in the chain. Maybe they are for mixdown and mastering, but by the time the signal gets to your monitors, it's waaaaaay too late.

I'm betting there are guys here that we could turn loose with 2- Audix OM2's, a Tascam 4 track, the first 4 things on that list, tell them they had to mix it on a home stereo, and they'd make your head spin with the results. I'm not one of them, but I wish I was.

It's funny, and I'm not pointing a finger at anyone, but we look to solutions in a box, that we can buy with our visa card and plug in and sound like the pros. I've certainly been guilty of it. But it doesn't work. Of course, the guys that sell us all that sexy gear don't want us to know that...

Makin' enemies
Keith

John
I tried spreading the mics out, like you said, and it did open up the stereo sound a lot. I started to loose the violin in the middle so instead of using the condenser mic I put the Sure 57 on it. I couldn’t position it very far away because it became noisy but even close up it sounds better that the condenser. I used the condenser on the bodhran and mixed the mic sound with the pickup sound. I’m not happy but it is better. I placed a MP3 file of the recording on the net in hopes one of you guys would listen to it and give me your opinion. Go ahead and be brutal; I’m a mechanic not a sound engineer. Anyway, it is a low resolution MP3 and I hear something funny in the MP3 that is not on the original. My windows media player really accents the bass. The tune sounded better on my monitors.
http://www.everett.cc/Heartstrings/jdlow.mp3
I used 2 AKG1000s in an ORTF pattern. The were about 4 feet away from the instrument. I filled in the violin with a Sure SM57 and used a Rode 2 with a pickup on the bodhran. I used a K&K pickup and mic on the bass. I added a little reverb and compression.
Thanks for all your help!

I need a female vocal mic? :shock:

Mic's don't have a sex, they are inanimate objects.

Sorry I couldn't resist. :lol:

Actually I like the AT's mentioned earlier but have also had great success with the CAD M9 (tube) recently, very smooth.

First of all, it sounds a lot better than I expected from your description of all the problems you were having! I don't hear any fatal flaws of the sort you get from a hopelessly crappy location.

BTW I've seen RTÉ (the Irish national broadcaster), mic a band like this with what looked like SM58s. They're rather used to this sort of setup as you can imagine. I think it's often a good idea to treat an Irish trad band like a rock band, as you have the same type of recording problems.

I think you've really captured the 'vibe' of the violin, and I think the 57 was a good call. It is an unusual sound for Irish fiddle though -which is cool! Some might say that the sound is a little on the harsh side, but I think it's the right sound.

First thing I'd do would be to remove, or lessen the reverb on the keyboard. Maybe you could DI it, and bring up the level of the dry signal to give it definition, to get that real Irish sound. In my opinion anyway, the bass line of the piano should always be very clear as its crucial to the sound. OTOH, I like the sound of the piano, as it sounds very much like what you'd hear at a seisuin. I think the accordion level is quite good, and doesn't sound overpowering. Glad to hear you were able to sort that problem out!

Have you EQed the signal going to reverb? You could help the definiton in the bass by cutting it before reverb. Of course it's difficult to tell how much of this reverb is artificial and which is room, but there's so much going on in the bass that you can't really afford to lose any definition down there. I think it sounds better at 02:04 when there are less bass issues.

Another thing I'd do would be to try a little EQ on the Bodhran condenser. You've captured plenty of bass, but a touch more of that 'clack' would work wonders. When it's being picked up by two sources, you can do this with just one of them. That should improve the definition. People who don't know the bodhran sound would probably not really hear the upper parts, but when you listen for it, it's most definitely there. I think it's important to think about the mix first. A less than ideal solo sound can come out sounding way better when everything is added together.

On the whole I really like this. It's been looping around since I started typing, and I think you have the basics for a very good recording technique. I think it's going to be easier to get the result you're looking for than you might have thought. Remember all of this stuff is just details.

You might like to play around with the mics to look for phase issues. It's hard to tell from the MP3, but it can provide some pleasant surprises.

BTW how does the band sound when you're standing in the room? Is it bass heavy? Just curious. Love the fiddle playing!

Well done!

John

PS How does it sound without the AKG 1000s, with just the instruments own mics and pickups? You could experiment with the balance between room mics and the others. It's not like your instrument mics are just spot mics. Whatever you do, have fun!

Big_D wrote: I need a female vocal mic? :shock:

Mic's don't have a sex, they are inanimate objects.

Sorry I couldn't resist. :lol:

Actually I like the AT's mentioned earlier but have also had great success with the CAD M9 (tube) recently, very smooth.

Having listened to most of the CAD microphones when they first came out I was NOT IMPRESSED. They all sounded thin and seemed to add a distorted (overbright midrange) sound when compared to other microphones such as the AT's, Neumanns and Schoeps but maybe they have gotten better with time. If you read the company's material they certainly have done their homework so I am glad that they are finally getting their microphones to sound better. Have you compared them to the Rodes or ATs in a direct comparison?

MTCW

Having listened to most of the CAD microphones when they first came out I was NOT IMPRESSED.

I'm sorry Thomas I didn't see your post.

I was not impressed either. However this Mic is very different from the rest of the CAD line. I tried it after reading Kurt's review of it and boy am I impressed now. It's a very warm and articulate mic and the highs have a sort of airy quality to them IMO. I have compared it to the Rode NTK and K2 and find it compares very favourably. I have not directly compared it to the AT 3060 or 4060 but have heard them and think it stacks up quite well. They normally sell for $400 but can often be found for $300 new. At that price it's one heck of a bargain. Here's Kurts review for more info.

(Dead Link Removed)