Skip to main content

Alright, I've finally gotten this all together.

These tests are less than scientific, as they were constrained by my time with the bands/artists and were meant to determine which was the best mic for our purposes. However, I did make some efforts at control:
All mics were run into my Focusrite ISA 428, with a little tweaking of the gain. No processing coming in or going out. The impedance was set at ISA 110 (still looking for an actual #).

W/o any further delay, here are are a series of tracks of a male vocalist signing the same verse.:

Shure SM58
(he sang a different part, but I'll get it up soon anyways)

Sennheiser e835
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/0cwx2h

Sennheiser MD 421-II
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/sohqjv

MXL 3000
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/43i10f

AKG C414 B-XLS
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/cnib7y

Blue Bluebird
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/lpmeqo

Cascade FATHEAD-II
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/yxbeum

Any questions, comments, concerns?
Please send them my way - I'm hoping to make this a useful experiment for all of us. 8-)

Comments

soapfloats Sat, 07/25/2009 - 23:36

Why GF?

One of the reasons for this experiment is so that we can all better understand which mics we choose and why.
Also so I can provide some examples of how moderately priced mics sound on different sources.
I decided to do this in large part due to the discussions around micing these sources w/ many of these mics.

After everyone's had their say, I'll post my picks and why, as well as provide a visual demonstration of my source(s) and mics as they were placed in the room.
And worry not, some guitar amp mic tests involving the 421, 57, and Fathead are forthcoming....

jammster Sun, 07/26/2009 - 07:51

soapfloats, thanks for taking the time to share your samples with us.

Interesting how different mics picked up the sound of the room more than others. Sennheiser 835 sounded pretty good, IMO better than the 421 too.

I agree with GF + hueseph, the 414 sounded nice and smooth while not being out of balance with his voice such as the bluebird.

I wonder if putting some tube compression on that bluebird would make it smoother? Anyway,IMO BB could use a little darkening because the treble is a bit much.

RemyRAD Sun, 07/26/2009 - 15:59

I didn't like the sound of the room and so, I found the 421 to be the most accurate sounding, intimate, most intelligible. I wasn't impressed with any of the condenser microphones at all since they all accentuated the room. And the room is boomy in its character. Not necessarily desirable since its muddy. Dynamics really do have many advantages which people seem to discount because they are not as bright nor as hot as their condenser cousins. The Fat Head, because of its bidirectional pattern also included too much of the room while also being too dark for his vocal type. Ribbons work out better for female vocalists than male vocalists because of their mellower tonality.

I'm for the 421
Mx. Remy Ann David

soapfloats Tue, 07/28/2009 - 00:30

I think you're rubbing off on me, Remy.

While I won't reveal the mic we chose just yet, I will say that the 421 is fast becoming my favorite mic - for exactly the reasons you mentioned. Even though the take is different, I still intend to get the 58 up.

On a related note, my 57s get a lot of use, 58s not so much b/c I sometimes prefer my Senn dynamics.

Interesting notes on the room as well. I treasure the space for its acoustics, but having tried to record other stuff simultaneously w/ drums, I realize the space is quite untamed.

I'll have some more male vocal tests up soon.
Then its on to some different, less exhaustive tests. Maybe more like examples...

RemyRAD Tue, 07/28/2009 - 10:31

Well, soapy, this is where I would be using downward expansion on those condenser microphones just to reduce the room resonance. A gate would be unnatural sounding since it turns the microphone on & off. Whereas the downward expander can be set to reduce level by 10 to 15 DB which makes a huge difference You don't completely lose the room but you certainly don't accentuate it either.

I don't think anybody has as yet come up with an acceptable downward expander preset that mimics the old KEPEX I. Everybody is emulating everything else but that. I can get close to the affirmationed units with a broadband dynamics software type, when I can draw in the characteristics I want since it is basically a compressor working in a lower region, in negative gain. But I still haven't found a good emulation. I'm close. But those older hardware units were really the first discrete transistor voltage controlled amplifiers. They did have a tendency to add some mush as VCA's do. And compared to many others, I used them post limiter rather than pre-limiter. And that's the name of that tune.

Whatever happened to Allison?
Mx. Remy Ann David

soapfloats Fri, 08/14/2009 - 23:37

Thanks for all the replies.

Special thanks to Remy for helping me learn something myself. Let me know when you get that emulation up to snuff - in the meantime, I'll try using that technique.

I've seen a lot of downloads (typically 20+), so I'm waiting for a few more opinions.

I'll post mine anyways...

We chose the 421, with the 414 and BB a close 2nd and 3rd, respectively. There were elements of the 414 and BB we liked for his voice, but we felt the 421 had the best balance of tone, presence, and space.
Plenty of presence from the BB, but not the right tone for him, the 414 sounded smooth and had a nice presence, but had a bit too much space that detracted from the tone too much.
The 421 was cleaner, had just enough space, and really flattered his baritone range w/o detracting from the higher notes, IMO.

When we finally get to the vox ODs for the album, I'll post a raw vox, a processed vox, and the vox in the mix.
Hopefully we can all learn a little about mic choices through the process.

Finally, I should have the 2nd round of male vox tests up tomorrow - they're uploading now.