Well, my answer is the Royer SF 12 , 24 or 24v with out a doubt, they are awesome for this. And if you need to reach in for some special area's, do it with what ya got and call it a day. Time align if you use additional spot mics other than the SF. If we were close, I would lend you mine.

DPA's are incredible ( 4011 or 4006). Mojave MA 100's, love em.

PS

I also use those Audix micro's They are pretty cool.

If I were closer you could use my R101 pair as well as my SF12. Is Cucco close enough to you to borrow/rent from him? What is your target date?

The NT5's are really quite decent and reasonably universally useful. If you are going to have that much else going on and can't get top end gear they will do you right IMO.

Hey Max. Do I understand you want to buy if you can because the rentals are slim to none? I dont know what the @Boss's budget will allow but you can get pairs of At4041's for a bit under $500. They are a flat and very directional mic. Good for your purpose here as they only give you back what you put in.

If not, give Jeremy a call.

Also dont overlook the ability of the "olde standard" SM57 for the alto and tenor sections. As spot mics anyways.........Good preamps make em work real well....surprisingly.

I really think you would LOVE the AT4041's. Every time I shoot mine out against others of this ilk I get more impressed. The only pair that has a bit more mojo for my ear has been the KM184's and that comes from that "Neumann sheen" that has no logical explanation other than "Its there". The AT's have a real good output, and are fairly sensitive as well a being accurate in what they reproduce. So no noise in a distant micing situation like a spot mic on choirs. Hmmmmm? !

The AT4051 is the same mic with detachable capsules. These are my favorite in the AT line honestly.

I'm sure you could get a good deal on a quantity of 3 Zigma CHI SD mics. They are quite nice. Call Greg at Pro Audio Toys or Warren at Zen Pro Audio.

Max, sent you a PM.

Ahhh, the old "Since you're here already, could we get.......etc......etc....etc...." Uh-huh. I feel yer pain my friend.

You know what happens when you pull a rabbit out of your hat to satisfy those last minute whims for your client, right? (that they expect you to do as if by magic)

They hire you again.

And the next time, they will just assume you can produce 3 rabbits.

and a mountain goat.

and a tin of Dapper Dan pomade.

and one pearl onion.

and a mating pair of wolverines.

and a 9v battery.

and some sort of ice sculpture.

How much longer until you're ready for us to soundcheck?

" Hey Moose, Rocko, help the Judge find his wallet......"

are'nt 1's valid at all club gigs?

I got a chance to play around with a pair of these recently. They are actually a pretty darn good mic. As a mic in that budget it works as well as the AT4041's which to me are the epitome of budget SDC's. I've had a pair of those for a while now and do get the opportunity to try others (its nice knowing and recording guys from the stores.....!) The 4041's have never failed to give a lasting impression and even beating out mics twice their price. The 614's are also in the realm of reality.

Its good to see you survived your session.

For the past 20 years I've tried to make my living having that same kind of fun. I would've just hung up a couple of SM57's. They sound great on choirs. Especially when you want to get the choir. I don't know why people think they are not professional enough? Aren't you already using good preamps? So noise can't be that big a factor. No bigger than the extra wash of junk from the rumble and the hiss of the HVAC you get to pick up in great detail with condenser microphones and especially the small ones. So like you said those cheap SDC didn't sound all that bad. And of course they didn't sound all that good either did they? 57's do.

Try it you'll like it. Really, honest.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Actually no. It's not better when it doesn't get you what you want even though you are aiming it at what you want. Because it's getting other stuff you actually don't want. Really, honestly, seriously. You're not taking into account the physical surroundings, acoustics and background interference. And a 57 going into a fine preamp sounds every bit as good as anybody's condenser thingies. What you deem to be better is of course it's beautiful broadband clarity known from those wonderful microphones we all love. Again though it's called the right tool for the job. Many of these location recordings can be incredibly difficult to capture well regardless of how good the acoustical environment may be. I'm not thinking out of the box here. This is just solid engineering. Of course in the studio, under well-controlled conditions, we would use the best junk we have. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't be using those beautiful German condenser microphones in other viable placements. As say closer up highlight microphones or solo microphones. But when you're dealing with some distance and still desire a tight capture window, these stupid dynamics for 100 lousy dollars as one out for me on many occasions throughout the years. And I've had to teach this to other teachers that are teaching audio to others. I know this seems hard to quantify. Electro-Voice RE-15/11'S have also worked out nicely. Sometimes you actually want those bandwidth limited less sensitive microphones to actually improve your quality. The quality of the Mix Max. And the greater control it provides. And as a professional, I'm never embarrassed about any of the professional tools I choose to use. Because it's not how much you spent or how it looks. In the end, it's how it sounds. And when ya choose microphones that already have a certain type of beneficial equalization built right into them, they actually end up highlighting what you want. There are plenty of us, back from the old days that frequently had mixers with no equalizer them. Such as an old Neil Munsey SSI box, with 8 microphone inputs, eight volume controls and eight pan pots. (Melcor 1731's a.k.a. API 2520's) Then everything came down to your selection and placement. Besides back then, we didn't have cheap affordable condenser microphones worth a damn. Yeah so, smoke 'em if you got 'em. Like I've also always said, good engineers do make great recordings with anything in front of them. Of course as you indicated, all of your 57's were being used on other stuff. And sometimes it's just plain impractical to swap your microphone selections once everything is set up. And we've all had to deal with those kinds of sessions. And that's actually when you make the BEST of it and what you do.

Better is only better when it's better for the proper application. And we all know that to be true.
Mx. Remy Ann David

RemyRAD, post: 395585 wrote: Actually no. It's not better when it doesn't get you what you want even though you are aiming it at what you want. Because it's getting other stuff you actually don't want. Really, honestly, seriously. You're not taking into account the physical surroundings, acoustics and background interference. And a 57 going into a fine preamp sounds every bit as good as anybody's condenser thingies. What you deem to be better is of course it's beautiful broadband clarity known from those wonderful microphones we all love. Again though it's called the right tool for the job. Many of these location recordings can be incredibly difficult to capture well regardless of how good the acoustical environment may be. I'm not thinking out of the box here. This is just solid engineering. Of course in the studio, under well-controlled conditions, we would use the best junk we have. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't be using those beautiful German condenser microphones in other viable placements. As say closer up highlight microphones or solo microphones. But when you're dealing with some distance and still desire a tight capture window, these stupid dynamics for 100 lousy dollars as one out for me on many occasions throughout the years. And I've had to teach this to other teachers that are teaching audio to others. I know this seems hard to quantify. Electro-Voice RE-15/11'S have also worked out nicely. Sometimes you actually want those bandwidth limited less sensitive microphones to actually improve your quality. The quality of the Mix Max. And the greater control it provides. And as a professional, I'm never embarrassed about any of the professional tools I choose to use. Because it's not how much you spent or how it looks. In the end, it's how it sounds. And when ya choose microphones that already have a certain type of beneficial equalization built right into them, they actually end up highlighting what you want. There are plenty of us, back from the old days that frequently had mixers with no equalizer them. Such as an old Neil Munsey SSI box, with 8 microphone inputs, eight volume controls and eight pan pots. (Melcor 1731's a.k.a. API 2520's) Then everything came down to your selection and placement. Besides back then, we didn't have cheap affordable condenser microphones worth a damn. Yeah so, smoke 'em if you got 'em. Like I've also always said, good engineers do make great recordings with anything in front of them. Of course as you indicated, all of your 57's were being used on other stuff. And sometimes it's just plain impractical to swap your microphone selections once everything is set up. And we've all had to deal with those kinds of sessions. And that's actually when you make the BEST of it and what you do.

Better is only better when it's better for the proper application. And we all know that to be true.
Mx. Remy Ann David

You know what Remy,

Its taken about 100 posts of you talking about SM58's to get it. And I think you just nailed it for me on this last one. I bet a few or more dynamic mic's and a Bricasti would sound superior to most detailed condenser in the majority of live halls. Most public rooms are far from perfect and that is precisely why 57's/ 58's have been the best mic going all these years.

I need to do some experimenting now. What goes around comes around.

Yeah and I bet your new Bricasti would add a lovely ambient cloud. I heard that last example you posted. And it provides for a fabulous depth.

I probably wouldn't be suggesting the 57/58's from back in the days of analog tape? But digital has changed everything and quite a bit in how we do things today. You'd miss that edge from the condenser microphones back in the days of analog tape if you only used 57 & 58's. But hey, I was still making nice recordings with those RE-10/11's into a nice custom tube mixer and into my REVOX A-77. And these were operatic and orchestral recordings, churches, musicals, etc.. I just think too much emphasis is placed upon capacitor/condenser microphones? Ribbons can also provide many similar benefits. And why frequently I'll be hanging them for a choir. Of course the extra edge I get from the API 3124's is quite airy sounding.

In the strange happenstance in a recording I did for a Los Angeles record label, in New Zealand, where I had schlepped my microphones and API 3124's, I accepted a compromise. A New Zealand label was simultaneously making a recording in the same cathedral after hour sessions. They didn't like my multiple microphones set up but their producer did. they had an AMEK BC-1 portable mixer. I found it much darker sounding than my API's. So instead of putting the ribbon microphone on the Wagnerian soprano as had been my intentions, she ended up on a 414. Then I got a similar flavor to what I would have gotten with the ribbon and the API's.

Given that those little SDC worked, simply says you know what you're doing. Bravo. If the equipment works? You're golden.

And I got a Grammy nomination for a recording I didn't consider to be my best.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Holy Toledo, 12 to 18 57's would be a lot. I had know idea you'd need that many! I've never used them for anything other than close proximity. But I'm eager to still try this for something now.

Remy, you just posted before I saw you here. I totally agree with you "I probably wouldn't be suggesting the 57/58's from back in the days of analog tape".
Today we have extreme clarity and its time to rethink a lot of old ways. I think you are onto something here. I often dislike the sound of condensers ( well I do love my Royers and :). Seems nothing that a serious graph (pultec ) can't do to get some air during the mix.

Have you used 57's on a choir like this before Remy? What is the range rule on these? One mic per 6ft x what?
Maybe not SM57's but another dynamic /brand is worth researching? Interesting to say the least.

John, have you ever used 57's for choirs?

I have used 57's on choir. They aren't my first choice for classical but work pretty well for gospel or a swing choir. When I used dynamic mic's though, I tend to use passive ribbons. The Royer 101's used in a "spaced pair" provide an outstanding sound field from about twelve feet back and seven feet tall angled down a bit. A coincident pair works best for something like the Swingle Singers or Manhattan Transfer.

Yeah that's basically what I'm talking about. And I'm usually running the 57's in a spaced configuration (similar to Omni's) hung up pointing down towards the floor. About 6/8 feet above their heads. Sometimes I've used up to 12 for three groups of four. Hanging them and shooting towards the floor eliminates that extra ambient bounce from the back and side walls that the other instruments also contribute to. And yeah, this works particularly well for gospel since most gospel is a little more rock 'n roll oriented. But it still works well for a Verdi Requiem and that got me an Emmy nomination for an NBC Television Christmas show. It was all going through the Neve console that I now own in studio A, NBC-TV Washington DC. And those had to be hung from the lighting grid and the the producer and director requested not to see any microphones at all! And you don't see any of the 13 microphones that were in use, anywhere. Some more Sennheiser M. KE-2's lavalier's used as highlight microphones on woodwinds, cello's, taped to the shaft of their music stands. AKG 451's hidden in a couple of onstage decorative plants near the solo singers on their long black capsule extension tubes. So I'd say that mix was rather organic LMAO. And thankfully, unlike the other control rooms, this one had a Lexicon PCM 70. So even though this was the largest television studio in Washington DC, it still needed some of that concert hall style reverberation since the set was designed to look a little bit like a cathedral in the opening shot. And they wanted that cathedral like sound. And that Emmy nomination got me my first DUI on the way home. So I actually lost twice that evening on the night of the Emmy awards show. My production lost to a piece of canned music for a sports show. The NBC group of folks was really shocked when that happened especially me. The other nomination for best audio went to a production from the folks from Galudet University which is a University for people who are stoned deaf. Or maybe just deaf? Obviously I was the one that was the other thing? Then it was I who told the NBC group of friends that we shouldn't drive home after the production was over. Especially since we had been imbibing on the free alcohol. So I gave everybody sobriety tests just like the police would have. We didn't leave until we could all pass the sobriety tests. Which was about 3 1/2 hours later after the production was over. Unfortunately when I got stopped even though I passed the sobriety test, I didn't pass the breathalyzer. I blew a legal limit and was arrested! So I'll never submit to doing their stupid little dance routine again. After passing the sobriety test the police officer said " before I let you go, I'd like you to blow into this...". Because I had passed his sobriety test. You know standing on one leg and touching your nose with both of your index fingers stuff?

There won't be a next time. I learned how to lose twice in that evening. LOL it really wasn't funny.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Even a nomination for an Emmy would be sweet, Kudo's.

Seems like a lot of work, cable and channels plus overlaps and dead spots yes? I like this idea for backup singers in a band, maybe small choirs and ideally where everyone can't deny something has to be done to overcome terrible acoustics or bleed.

I was originally considering hanging the Sennheiser MKE 2's over the choir but even those tiny black cords could be seen on camera. So I pulled those out and stuck up the 57's from about 16 feet over their heads. Hanging only inches below the lighting grid. It was like a 200 voice choir on bleachers and it worked out quite nicely. The main floor microphones over the orchestra were a pair of KM 86's in an ORTF configuration with a couple of Outrigger KM-84's. Those other highlight microphones with the lavalier's and a pair of 451's on the soloists. And it was either 13 or 14 inputs? I forget? Memory is failing along with my career. I guess they are going hand-in-hand these days? Great. And as I recall, the only equalization used was just some high pass filtering on the Neve. I was also bumping up some of the low-end on things like those cello highlight lavalier's, along with some high pass filtering. Woodwind section not so much so. There was plenty of air there.

I look forward to hearing how your efforts turn out when you use some 57's on choral and symphonic productions? You'll laugh when you hear how good they sound. You know most things that you use those microphones on always sound good. I think they are one of the most longest lived and most enduring microphones ever made. My god where can you get quality like that for $100 anymore today? 57, 58's I don't care both the same. Don't like the big metal ball? Give it a s-e-x change and unscrew it. Voilà! Instant 57, no waiting. It's crazy how good these microphones sound into Primo preamps.

I had actually wanted to use some ribbon microphones on that NBC-TV, Verdi Requiem. Unfortunately, a few years earlier, they threw out a whole box full of RCA 77 DX's. I just cringe when I think about that. I think that happened on one of my days off otherwise I would have been in the dumpster for sure. It makes me sick just to think about that. And this is how I find most engineering trends go. What was bad yesterday is now highly sought after today. I never missed a beat when it came to ribbon microphones, all the way back to when I was 15.

I've been intrigued by those Royer ribbons ever since they came out. I think given the opportunity to own a pair, I'd still go with the original passive units. That tube version was wild sounding and almost like a condenser microphone OMG. And I actually really like that tube version over their transistor version, active ribbon microphones. I actually asked them whether they built their microphone with any influence from the B&O ribbon? They said it was their inspiration.

Funny enough that so many of you guys here love AT condenser microphones but I really haven't heard anybody talk about either of their two new ribbons? What up?

I love this website. Thank you thank you thank you.
Mx. Remy Ann David