Mike Meyers, Mike Campbell, Mike Farrell, my childhood friend, Mike Jackson ....

microphone.. In Latin micro means "little", phone means "voice". Microphone.., = mic..we don't say "mikeroscope" or "mikero technology", do we? not trying to be a smart ass, this just drives me nuts! :roll:

To answer your question any mic would be suitable. Different types of mics don't work better or worse with different recording software programs but rather different applications. Voice, guitar amp, bass amp, drums, etc.
Kurt

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
Mike Meyers, Mike Campbell, Mike Farrell, my childhood friend, Mike Jackson ....

microphone.. In Latin micro means "little", phone means "voice". Microphone.., = mic..we don't say "mikeroscope", do we? not trying to be a smart ass, this just drives me nuts!

Kurt's quite right (as usual). HOWEVER if we're talking about the act of placing a mic(rophone) in front of (or above) something then the CORRECT term is MIKING

Not Micing, for Heaven's sake :roll:

Originally posted by Mark7:
..... if we're talking about the act of placing a mic(rophone) in front of (or above) something then the CORRECT term is MIKING

Not Micing, for Heaven's sake :roll:

I wonder why this is? I suspect it is a hangover from the German spelling of Microphone (Mikrophone). If this is the case, it would seem that either use would be acceptable. Sort of like cheque or check, colour or color, miking or micing, with the latter versions being the Americanization (U.S.A.) of the spelling.

I believe the DMP-3 is a mic preamp made by M-Audio.(as opposed to DP-3 which is recording software).
I have not ever used one, but I hear they are fairly neutral and match up reasonably well with most microphones whether dynamic or condensor.

Sorry I couldn't help more.

Originally posted by Tom Menikos:
I believe the DMP-3 is a mic preamp made by M-Audio.(as opposed to DP-3 which is recording software).
I have not ever used one, but I hear they are fairly neutral and match up reasonably well with most microphones whether dynamic or condensor.

Sorry I couldn't help more.

OOOPS! I guess I need new glasses! I thought it said DP3 , sorry, Kurt

Oh the abuse us novices must take. Okay mic it will be from now.

Originally posted by DaveX:
Oh the abuse us novices must take. Okay mic it will be from now.

DaveX,
Sorry, I didn't mean to single you out! It's just that this particular thing drives me nuts! You're not the only one guilty of this. It is widespread, and there are those who really know better that are doing it just for the sake of trying to implement a change in the language ....

I've read some post that state that the dmp3 is quite a good mic pre, for the money, can anyone get any personal experience using this pre for vocals and as a DI box, thanks

Yep, got one, love it.

I've used it on ac. guitar (with an SP B3 and with two Sennheiser MKH-416's on another occasion) and on vocals (SP C1 and B3).

Very very very clean pre with almost no noise. Not a bright pre, just very transparent.

Ofcourse, the only other pre's I have are the ones in my Korg D16, but I've used various budget-midrange mixing desks, and the DMP outperforms them easily... even the more expensive A&H stuff, when it comes to noise.

No one, to my knowledge, writes MIKErophone, either!

But, to pretend that language is built on logic is silly!

Words mean what we want them to mean. There is only a conflict when two people can't communicate, and obviously you and probably everyone else reading, knew EXACTLY what was being conveyed.

The Mic-Mike conflict lies in the fact that, under the Geneva convention, "mic" should be pronounced either as "mick" or as "mice", and it's pronunciation as "mike" is a non-obvious exception to the common rules. "Mike", on the other hand has no such conflict!

I vote for MIKE and I'm damned proud of it!

Originally posted by Speeddemon:
Yep, got one, love it. I've used it on ac. guitar (with an SP B3 and with two Sennheiser MKH-416's on another occasion) and on vocals (SP C1 and B3). Very very very clean pre with almost no noise. Not a bright pre, just very transparent.

DITTO!!

I have a DMP3 and I'd like to pick up another (or two..) Deals are available at Guitar Center.

I use it for everything and have had the same results - clear, clean and noiseless. I'm pretty much limited to acoustic bands and small jazz bands, not high wattage stuff. I use it with MXL 603s, SP B1s and an SP C3. I've also run an SM57 through it with great results. The preamp is incredible for the money.

Originally posted by Mark7:

Kurt's quite right (as usual). HOWEVER

if we're talking about the act of placing a mic(rophone) in front of (or above) something then the CORRECT term is MIKING

Not Micing, for Heaven's sake :roll: i like using my own compromise solution, although perhaps others have independently come up with the same idea;

"mic'ing"

I use the DMP3 as a couple of auxiliary channels, and as the main pre for my suitcase studio, a portable setup based on Korg PXR4 Pandora. Yeah, if you grind enough balls you can get one at Guitarrgh Center for $119, I did it. Is it an Avalon?- No. does it work?-Yes. Because the suitcase studio is small, I need a versatile pair of mics I can use for guit, vox, as a spaced pair, etc., and they have to be fairly cheap (read expendable). I've had very good luck with a pair of AKG C2000B's. This mid-size diaphragm mic is often overlooked, mainly due to C3000B, which mostly sucks. Everybody figured if the 3000B sucked for $300, the 2000B for $200 must suck more. I think that's wrong, and I have found them to be versatile studio workhorses.-Richie

This mid-size diaphragm mic is often overlooked, mainly due to C3000B, which mostly sucks. Everybody figured if the 3000B sucked for $300, the 2000B for $200 must suck more.

What don't you like about the 3000B? I'm fairly happy with mine. It is the only large diaphragm I own though. Also, what do you like about the 2000B that makes it much better? For mics below $300 I haven't heard bad things about the 3000B, only the original 3000.