How good is this mic for vocals?
Comments
That icicle you are toting won't make the most of the Rode. It
That icicle you are toting won't make the most of the Rode. It would be a waste of money if you ask me. The icicle is the weakest link in your chain as it is, and if you ask me it needs replacing if you want higher quality vocal work.
Keep Rockin though lml :twisted: lml
-Jake
Guitarfreak wrote: That icicle you are toting won't make the mos
Guitarfreak wrote: That icicle you are toting won't make the most of the Rode. It would be a waste of money if you ask me. The icicle is the weakest link in your chain as it is, and if you ask me it needs replacing if you want higher quality vocal work.
Keep Rockin though lml :twisted: lml
-Jake
Well, first of all whats better SM58+Icicle or NT1A+Icicle.
And second, some people tell me the icicle is fine, others say it's doing a bad job, but can anyone just tell me WHY it's the "weakest link"?? Does it have a bad reputation? Has anyone even used it when they tell me its bad? Its getting good reviews and it says its "high quality" input.. but I just would like to know WHY its so bad.
First of all, don't listen to advertisements. They are trying t
First of all, don't listen to advertisements. They are trying to sell a product, and they did. A 58 and nt1 through an icicle won't be much different, it isn't until you get better hardware that the differences in mics will really start to show.
The bottom line is that you are trying to put a Corvette engine in a used Buick and roll up to the drag strip for a day at the tracks. The icicle isn't bad, but it isn't good either. It lacks the features and flexibility that will make great recordings.
Guitarfreak wrote: First of all, don't listen to advertisements.
Guitarfreak wrote: First of all, don't listen to advertisements. They are trying to sell a product, and they did. a 58 and nt1 through an icicle won't be much different, it isn't until you get better hardware that the differences in mics will really start to show.
The bottom line is that you are trying to put a Corvette engine in a used Buick and roll up to the drag strip for a day at the tracks. The icicle isn't bad, but it isn't good either. It lacks the features and flexibility that will make great recordings.
I understand, it's just - I'm not looking for top of the line quality here. I am on a budget, and what I'm making is a demo CD that will probably maybe go on iTunes. The only thing I care about is not getting a wet, ametuer karaoke sound. I want a decent, quasi-pro sound that makes the vocals flow and assimilate into the music and not be some karaoke ameteur. I want it to be passable, I'll be sending this to record companies haha. So will what I have accomplish that minimal task?
If you noticed in your last thread nobody recommended a condense
If you noticed in your last thread nobody recommended a condenser, nobody even said a new mic would solve your problem. But a few of us did say that a new interface was in order. Trust us, you can get a professional sound out of a 58, many studios do. You asked the professionals, you got your response, now you make your decision.
...no pressure 8)
Dude, the Icicle is fine. Does it do the job? Does it give you h
Dude, the Icicle is fine. Does it do the job? Does it give you headaches? Does it work? Right. Keep it, until you have money to be upgrading.
I'd rather know how to use an ugly, bent $5 hammer than own a $100 hammer made of polished chrome, but not know how to use it properly.
Codemonkey wrote: Dude, the Icicle is fine. Does it do the job?
Codemonkey wrote: Dude, the Icicle is fine. Does it do the job? Does it give you headaches? Does it work? Right. Keep it, until you have money to be upgrading.
I'd rather know how to use an ugly, bent $5 hammer than own a $100 hammer made of polished chrome, but not know how to use it properly.
Thanks, I mean all the other USB interfaces are very very expensive. But is it true that SM58 and NT1A will sound the exact same with this icicle? I'm looking for a difference in voice definition, like hearing those little nuances in the voice that make it sound more real. I thought a condenser mic would pick those up better.
And can I use a windscreen instead of a pop filter on a condensor? Will it work?
He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle didn't sound good, a
He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle didn't sound good, and in his sound clip there were some obvious problems. This could also be user error though. I didn't think of that though. Codemonkey damn you :evil: . Why must you confuse our young disciple. Maybe he just needs a good spanking and a lesson in gain structuring.
And I did not say they would sound exactly the same, but that it won't be night and day difference. I just think if you are willing to spend over 200 on a mic you could drop that same amount or a little more on a better interface.
Guitarfreak wrote: He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle d
Guitarfreak wrote: He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle didn't sound good, and in his sound clip there were some obvious problems. This could also be user error though. I didn't think of that though. Codemonkey damn you :evil: . Why must you confuse our young disciple. Maybe he just needs a good spanking and a lesson in gain structuring.
The only real problem was the distortion in the voice.. which is definately the gain issue since I turned it up all the way and when it's lower that problem doesn't happen.
Guitarfreak wrote: He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle d
Guitarfreak wrote: He said in his last thread that 58 + icicle didn't sound good, and in his sound clip there were some obvious problems. This could also be user error though. I didn't think of that though. Codemonkey damn you :evil: . Why must you confuse our young disciple. Maybe he just needs a good spanking and a lesson in gain structuring.
And I did not say they would sound exactly the same, but that it won't be night and day difference. I just think if you are willing to spend over 200 on a mic you could drop that same amount or a little more on a better interface.
Well see I'm offered the NT1A at a verrrryyy low good price. The seller also has a really good reputation so since it's so low and I need a condenser mic for the nuances, I thought I should get it. Don't you agree? I'm sure it wont be more than $50 dollars with this guy and trust me it's def not shady.
Codemonkey wrote: I said: If you want nuances, go for the conden
Codemonkey wrote: I said:
If you want nuances, go for the condenser. Bear in mind those "nuances" will include the acoustics of your room and any background noise like computer fans or HVAC...
Ooh okay thanks!!
Yeah I know the room might be bad but if its totally quiet and I use a noise gate won't it be manageable?
It is really recommended that you use a condenser in a sonically
It is really recommended that you use a condenser in a sonically sound room. I have no firsthand experience with the noises that a condenser picks up, but I have heard things. Like being able to hear an airplane pass overhead, or the garbage truck outside, or the sound of the air conditioning vents kicking on. That's part of the reason I was also steering you away from making a bum decision.
Just thought I'd put that in there since nobody is responding and I'm off to work soon.
Noise gates only work under a certain threshold. Whenever there
Noise gates only work under a certain threshold. Whenever there is a sound above the threshold it is as if you had no gate at all. So if the washing machine is going in the background, then when the singer sings a phrase the washing machine will be heard, and when the singer stops so does the machine. You can EQ the sound down a bit, but you are also affecting the voice as well. The only way to truly remove a sound from a recording is to not let it be recorded in the first place.
Link555 wrote: Sorry Guitarfreak what is a "sonically sound room
Link555 wrote: Sorry Guitarfreak what is a "sonically sound room"?
Oh and I have to disagree with you, the Rode NT1A and SM58 will sound very different through the same pre and ADC.
A treated room? Or does vocal booth ring a bell? Come on man I know your not that dumb.
Yes, but will it sound like a rode NT1A should sound...through a $59.99 USB interface?
Like I said...Corvette engine in a used Buick. The Rode is too good for that USB stick.
Guitarfreak- Thanks for clearing that up. Also I have not used t
Guitarfreak- Thanks for clearing that up. Also I have not used the ICICLE, but personally I would not rule it out based on cost alone.
mannyr- I have the Rode NT2, which is different from the NT1A. So I really don't have much to say, other than NT2 can be a bit harsh in the 4k area. From the bode plot NT1A looks a bit hyped, might make an excellent floor tom mic...
The S1 is a different animal, and I have not used it either. It looks a bit like Sm57 on the bode plot. It looks a bit weak in the low end and a bit bright. Maybe nice on a snare drum or elec guitar?
Which is the best? Hard question, ....what would I pick if I could only pick one...NT1A- simply because of the better low end response. It might make the mic more useful for more sources.
mannyr "What's better for recording, Rode NT1A or S1?" Of defini
mannyr "What's better for recording, Rode NT1A or S1?"
Of definitely, without a doubt for recording NT1A, no one would EVER use the S1 for recording.
PLEASE get real! There are no definitive answers to questions like that. Each mic has it its own "personality" and potential usage and after that it is the very subjective tone that someone is looking for. But like everyone here is also trying to tell you the whole recording chain affects this in the end.
Just to clear a few things, and why I am against the icicle idea
Just to clear a few things, and why I am against the icicle idea. Also, I am not basing my judgment on cost alone. TC said that his SM58 sounds "boxy", and if the icicle can't even make an SM58 sound good, what is it going to do to the subtle nuance of a decent condenser like a Rode? Add room noise and plosives into the mix and you are better off with a Radio Shack mic and a 5 dollar pack of pantyhose...I'm just saying.
Sorry to be so straightforward, but I feel like Mannyr isn't listening. I just don't want him to make a big purchase and not like the results.
Radio shack mic that breaks in 5 months? The SM58 might sound l
Radio shack mic that breaks in 5 months?
The SM58 might sound less than adequate through the icicle, big deal.
Down the line, you're $30 better off for not having bought radio shack junk and you can get a proper interface with more channels and features.
Until then you do your damnedest to learn to work the mic. Hell, you might even like the tone.
FWIW: if I put a Mini engine into a Volvo, it's still a car. Not a great one, but it's a car.
Yes I'm spewing conflicting advice.
No you don't need the best gear.
What did you learn to drive in? Cheap car? Then bought a more expensive one? Then moved up, and up, and up? Until one day you're 50, driving a Rolls Royce and proud of where you've got to in life.
Guitarfreak wrote: Just to clear a few things, and why I am agai
Guitarfreak wrote: Just to clear a few things, and why I am against the icicle idea. Also, I am not basing my judgment on cost alone. TC said that his SM58 sounds "boxy", and if the icicle can't even make an SM58 sound good, what is it going to do to the subtle nuance of a decent condenser like a Rode? Add room noise and plosives into the mix and you are better off with a Radio Shack mic and a 5 dollar pack of pantyhose...I'm just saying.
Sorry to be so straightforward, but I feel like Mannyr isn't listening. I just don't want him to make a big purchase and not like the results.
Guitarfreak, I understand how the SM58 would never sound boxy on it's own. But I truely think the problem is the area I'm recording in - it's like a 3f t wide square nook with cement walls, I'm sure that's why it's sounding boxy - and even then it's not as stuffy as your probably thinking. Right now the sound is pretty decent, I just want it to sound compeltely fresh and open, so I don't think it's the icicle, althought I know thats not high quality, but I think it's the room.
Until one day you're 50, driving a Rolls Royce and proud of wher
Until one day you're 50, driving a Rolls Royce and proud of where you've got to in life.
Of course by this point you have completely given up on being an audio engineer and buying gear and went and found a job that actually consistently pays six figures. And you don't invest with Bernie Madof.
Oh ok, if you think it is the room then I believe you. The room
Oh ok, if you think it is the room then I believe you. The room has more to do with the overall product then you may think right now. I'd still like to hear a recording of that SM58 through the icicle in a better sounding room though. Just for my own benefit, so I know for the future how that interface really is.
A condenser might not be the best addition just yet, but it is a big step. Just know that in the near future you should look to get better hardware before any more mics. I'd consider it the next step after the condenser. But then again that's what I would do.
Ok- got it. Personally I don't trust the marketing of audio gea
Ok- got it. Personally I don't trust the marketing of audio gear. Audio marketing dwells on "black magic" crap, people so easily confuse a low price tag with poor quality. Sometimes great things are cheap, and sometimes expensive things are crap. Your correct, trying it for yourself is the only way to find out.
It certainly wasn't the price tag or brand that turned me off.
It certainly wasn't the price tag or brand that turned me off. I mean it's BLUE, you know they make good stuff. I heard the recording that he made and it didn't sound like a 58 should in my head. It wasn't until just now that I learned that he recorded in a closet lined with cinderblocks @_@ So that could account for most of the problem. Poor gain structuring/EQ work for the rest I guess.
Guitarfreak wrote: It certainly wasn't the price tag or brand th
Guitarfreak wrote: It certainly wasn't the price tag or brand that turned me off. I mean it's BLUE, you know they make good stuff. I heard the recording that he made and it didn't sound like a 58 should in my head. It wasn't until just now that I learned that he recorded in a closet lined with cinderblocks @_@ So that could account for most of the problem. Poor gain structuring/EQ work for the rest I guess.
Ooh so Blue's a well-respected company in the recording industry? That makes me feel better about my Icicle, but I mean they have the stupidest names - I have keep saying Icicle this, icicle that and make it look as if it was a little toy. Now at least I can take it seriously.
Other people have been arguing that you should upgrade the icicl
Other people have been arguing that you should upgrade the icicle before other parts of the signal chain. I guess that is the way I would do it as well. However, there is an argument for getting a microphone first. Microphones are stable technology. Unless someone invents some amazing new device, a good microphone purchased today will be a good microphone 20 years from now. That's not true of digital technology like interfaces. The best digital gear of 1989 would be - well (exaggeration alert) - sort of like the A/D in the icicle. (The preamps in the icicle are another story.) So if you are really into buying a microphone now and you can get a good one within your budget (a big if) it won't be a waste of money even if other parts of your signal chain prevent you from getting the full benefit of the purchase at first.
It's good but you need an interface to use it.
It's good but you need an interface to use it.