Just looking to get some opinions about which mics everyone prefers to use for recording drums overhead.
Comments
Ustas, post: 401953 wrote: [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording
Ustas, post: 401953 wrote: [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]Kurt Foster[/]="http://recording.or…"]Kurt Foster[/], as they say in Russia - ППКС, which means - subscribe to every word about 57/58 for ohs.
But the vintage (and new too) U87 not silk and clear, they have BIG NOSE around lowest middle. Course, It's not BIG problem if you have good eq and the ear, one ore more
picky picky picky. if you guys over there hate U87s so much, pack them up and send them to meeeee! i'll be happy to trade you 57's and 58's straight across and take those noisy beasts off your hands. :rolleyes: in fact, i'll trade you 2 shures for 1 neumman ... what a deal!
Well there ya go? I actually prefer the downloadable, so I can l
Well there ya go? I actually prefer the downloadable, so I can look at it more carefully, play around with it if I want to, pitch it to death, laugh my ass off or want something really horrible to play for other people. The virus software and good old Windows 8 will help prevent malicious software from getting loaded while you are. What's to worry? If they really wanted to get nasty and they do, they could hack into some of your downloadable drivers and you'd still be left wondering? Not that the reports of hacking don't continue on a daily basis in the news, mostly from China. Of course it's from China. It's from all the disgruntled slave wage labor that got a free computer from the company they worked for instead of that $20 yearly bonus, they needed to buy food with. So they stay at home and play with their computers and their state provided high-speed Internet service and think about that lovely puppy dog brisket they're not having for dinner tonight.
No artificial ingredients like feline byproducts.
Mx. Remy Ann David
K, I have seen numerous uncompressed, .wav file downloads availa
K, I have seen numerous uncompressed, .wav file downloads available today. Some available as 24-bit, 96 kHz in presenting some of these biased comparisons. Yes with all of the artifacting in MP3, it's good enough to evaluate one dog bark over another dog bark. Of course it could be scaring the algorithm? And therefore cannot provide an adequate basis for any kind of real comparisons worth the cost of the dog food. But dogs and kids and most other folks don't seem to mind MP3s with their dogs and/or cats accidentally eating their food while watching a ballgame. And everybody wonders why your pets give you those poor pathetic eyes?
Tender vittles goes well with ribbon microphones.
Mx. Remy Ann David
I apologize for the bad English. I'm not talking about the noise
I apologize for the bad English. I'm not talking about the noise, I was talking about nose.
And also, I'm not a great expert veterinary and dog food. At home I have a cat.
But.
Let's go back to talking on the overhead:
anybody listen to these tracks or have reload it?
To my regret, WAW files is not available for me.
Maybe after the middle of april...
Upload to soundcloud -
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Mihstep's sounds on SoundCloud - Hear the world[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Mihstep's sounds on SoundCloud - Hear the world[/]
I understood the "nose" comment. A "bump" in the frequency respo
I understood the "nose" comment. A "bump" in the frequency response......
There are as many opinions of overhead micing techniques as there are recording engineers. I'll go even further and say that a single engineer that knows what is happening will use any number of things to get the capture down on whatever it is being recorded to, with the most ease and best fidelity possible....given the cirumstances.
As I have said before, the SPACE is the key...and it is also the limiter of what can be accomplished. Living boldly within parameters can get you recordings with flair and possibilities. Staying within the parameters of what you're given can get you accuracy and solid foundational work to support the song. Being timid can get you poorly designed tic-tac sounding tracks which immediately exhaust the possibility of anyone being interested in listening to the recording.
And then theres dealing with the animal called a Drummer. Don't get me wrong.....ALL of my recordings from 1975 onward are based on the truism that you HAVE to get a great drum track or you're doomed, so I'm saying this totally tongue in cheek but truthfully and with admiration. Dealing with the idiosyncrasies of this drumming individual is as important as placing the mic correctly. So studying how the drums are hit and to what effect is an intergral part of the process. If you deal with the same drum person on a regular basis, you are getting this important step down whether you spent the time actually acknowledgeing this or not. Its just like the 'rote' system of learning. Familiarity breeds knowledge. And how this is intergrated into mic selection has everything to do with how the drums are being played in the space provided.
Like this. If you have a small relatively dead air space and you have a 'basher', your overheads are going to be used exclusively for the entire kit with, perhaps, the kick and snare mics filling a 'presense' or an 'articulation' gap in the process. In order to 'tune out' the nodes of this space, SDC's would be the choice. I will almost always use two pairs in this situation forthe overheads. Left/right, front/rear. It gives the dimensionality I think a kit needs to have and the limitations of space wont allow at a high volume.
If you have an articulate drummer who has good control of volume and dynamics in this same small space, you can not only close mic, but you can place LDC's in such a way as to create a sense of spacial awareness for the kit. SDC's still but more for cymbal capture in the overheads. I will use a non-coincidental pair and get them right down on the ride and the primary crash as well as add a hi-hat mic. A lot of folks dont like the hat mic. Mostly because they havent gotten a good sound from one and had it be exclusive enough to use it without effect from other parts of the kit. This is all about the cymbals themselves. Soft, quiet hats with lots of tone are the key. Every studio should have a proven set for anyone coming in to play drums on tracks. Hats that are made to cut through a dense live stage mix will not always work in a recording. Capturing this part of the BEAT is essential in having the song move like its being played. So dont forsake it or expect for the overhead capture to have the same impact as a close mic'd hat will.
In a large well-oiled room. these things change easily and control becomes something that is done acoustically rather than electronically. Getting the Beatles drum sound wasnt just the three or four mics and the type and choice of mics, it was all about Studio Two at Abbey Road. well, that and the vision of how the drums affected the music. So, in a big room, the tuning of the drums becomes so critical in the separation of the parts of the instrument itself. You may say, "Hey, Dogg, wouldn't this be true in a small room too?"...Well, yes but simply the nature of a small room doesnt allow for the sound to totally 'bloom' and develop in the way a large area will. So intermodulations in the small semi-dead area are going to be less defined by the time the sound gets to the mics.
But still tune the friking drums correctly........
Personally....I like 'honest' mics. AT4041's, AT 4033's, KSM32's, Kel's, Royer's. I want to get the kit as it is. And if it needs changing to fit the music then by all means do it at the instrument level first.
Theres my book for the day.
[quote=Kurt Foster, post: 402025]ohh now i understand ... as i
[quote=Kurt Foster, post: 402025]ohh now i understand ...
as if 57's or 58's are ruler flat?
Kurt Foster,
You say to yourself? No one said that the 57/58 compared with 87. I wrote that I agree with you on the use of them on the OHs. Dogg wrote that I knew about the "nose" at low frequencies.
Sorry for my English again, I will not write, just post links to compare microphones.
Ustas, post: 402087 wrote: Kurt Foster, You say to yourself?
Ustas, post: 402087 wrote:
Kurt Foster,
You say to yourself? No one said that the 57/58 compared with 87. I wrote that I agree with you on the use of them on the OHs. Dogg wrote that I knew about the "nose" at low frequencies.
Sorry for my English again, I will not write, just post links to compare microphones.
don't take it so seriously. it's just the interweb thing ... your English is fine. probably better than mine. don't let my sour puss attitude stop you from posting. it's a free world.
thumbkurt
Davedog, post: 402023 wrote: There are as many opinions of over
Davedog, post: 402023 wrote:
There are as many opinions of overhead micing techniques as there are recording engineers. I'll go even further and say that a single engineer that knows what is happening will use any number of things to get the capture down on whatever it is being recorded to, with the most ease and best fidelity possible....given the cirumstances.A lot of folks dont like the hat mic. Mostly because they havent gotten a good sound from one and had it be exclusive enough to use it without effect from other parts of the kit. This is all about the cymbals themselves. Soft, quiet hats with lots of tone are the key. Every studio should have a proven set for anyone coming in to play drums on tracks. Hats that are made to cut through a dense live stage mix will not always work in a recording. Capturing this part of the BEAT is essential in having the song move like its being played. So dont forsake it or expect for the overhead capture to have the same impact as a close mic'd hat will.
For me, it depends entirely on the situation.
There are recording scenarios where the HH is more of a spatial texture, and it's not required to be in your face in order to move things along.
That being said, sometimes a softer song style will benefit more from a direct mic, because softer and more subtle nuances can get lost, if the player is working with more of a "finesse" style, and O.H.'s can't always grab those gentle nuances - things like a soft foot, or softer syncopated sticking, etc., to the degree that they are sometimes needed.
For my own stuff, I'd say it's probably about a 70/30 split ... (And yes, I'm a drummer as well as an engineer)... the 70 would represent the percentage of those times where I don't use a direct mic on the HH.
I don't always want the hi hat to cut through the mix ... much of the time, at least for my own writing and recording style, I prefer it to sit in the mix within the stereo depth of the O.H.'s.
There's a certain "silkiness" to the hat that can result when using a pair of nice O.H.'s - giving it a nice spacial presence - often without the harshness that can accompany a direct mic'd hat.... but ...you also need a good sounding room in which to record for that O.H. array to really capture that silky and spatial presence.
I agree with Dave completely that the types of cymbals play a crucial role, as do the mics, as does the room, as does the player.
IMO it's based entirely on the song style/scenario/environment at that given time, and taking into account those other quotients I mentioned above.
IMHO of course,
-d.
DonnyThompson, post: 402090 wrote: For me, it depends entirely o
DonnyThompson, post: 402090 wrote: For me, it depends entirely on the situation.
There are recording scenarios where the HH is more of a spatial texture, and it's not required to be in your face in order to move things along.
That being said, sometimes a softer song style will benefit more from a direct mic, because softer and more subtle nuances can get lost, if the player is working with more of a "finesse" style, and O.H.'s can't always grab those gentle nuances - things like a soft foot, or softer syncopated sticking, etc., to the degree that they are sometimes needed.
For my own stuff, I'd say it's probably about a 70/30 split ... (And yes, I'm a drummer as well as an engineer)... the 70 would represent the percentage of those times where I don't use a direct mic on the HH.
I don't always want the hi hat to cut through the mix ... much of the time, at least for my own writing and recording style, I prefer it to sit in the mix within the stereo depth of the O.H.'s.
There's a certain "silkiness" to the hat that can result when using a pair of nice O.H.'s - giving it a nice spacial presence - often without the harshness that can accompany a direct mic'd hat.... but ...you also need a good sounding room in which to record for that O.H. array to really capture that silky and spatial presence.
I agree with Dave completely that the types of cymbals play a crucial role, as do the mics, as does the room, as does the player.
IMO it's based entirely on the song style/scenario/environment at that given time, and taking into account those other quotients I mentioned above.
IMHO of course,
-d.
I could not agree more. Texture is everything in capturing the drums. Some 'texture' is rampant with seriously heavy whacking....other, not so much. A good experienced drummer who understands the nuances of how and where to hit things as well as having an accurate metronome is a priceless addition to a recording. I'm not a fan of drummers who think that every four beats requires or deserves a crash. There is so much more language that can be exchanged with just the trap kit....ie: kick,snare, hat. Not to say that well placed crashes arent a spectacular part of a drum track....they are, but the taste factor is something that is lacking in a lot of players who do a lot of live small venues. I think its a repressed need to be heard above the stinking guitar players.....!!! LOLOL
In my room, currently, I have a set of cymbals that seem to record well. Old Zildjians and a beautiful Sabian RawBell dry ride. These work well with the Frankenstein kit. And I have a small room so the emphasis is on drums that tune well, arent overly loud, and are infinately adjustable to different playing styles and seat positions.
As for the hat micing...I use a variety of mics that reflect the style of track and the sounds needed. I ALWAYS put one up even though I dont use it always....I have a couple of secret weapon mics that I'll share. One: Beyer Dynamic...mostly any model. 201 and Soundstar 400 work really well. Two: AKG D1000...notice the 'D'. Three: Audio Technica 4041...aim and shoot. also ATM-33a. Puts the 'beef' in the hats. And the real killer part is the preamp. I've been using a lot of different things over the years and have finally settled on one that (surprisingly) does the trick every time. I was going to sell mine when I bought a few higher end pres because I just wasnt even turning it on and then one day I wanted a hat mic and was out of pres for the whole band recording...Now I'll never use it for anything else. PreSonus Eureka. Yep... adjustable, compressor, EQ, variable impedance, in and out gains....You can tailor this to exactly what you want on the hat. Who knew? Combine this with my Phoenix Audio DRS-Q4 on the overheads and the cymbals get you where you want to go. With the Toft ATB taking care of the rest of the kit and the room...It works out.
I always listen to the drum set in person before I start putting
I always listen to the drum set in person before I start putting microphones on it even though I have my general established procedures and equipment. When I hear those heavy cymbals that sound like somebody is beating on a trash can lid, that automatically tells me small diaphragm condensers on the overheads. Because I don't like the sound of trashcan like sounding cymbals. So it's really important to listen to the drum set first, in person, in the room in which you want to record them in. But that's also assuming you have the drum set in a decent sounding room. Not a bedroom or a basement. So overhead drum miking is something of a misnomer when dealing with low ceilings. But it's not really overhead microphones. It's microphones for the cymbals and for the drums because you don't have enough height and ya don't have enough room to actually call them overhead microphones.
For the most part in the smaller studios the overhead microphones on drums are never much more than 3 feet above the tallest cymbal. That's really not an overhead microphone that's a cymbal microphone. Overhead would presume you have some ceiling height and a fairly large space. And that's not your typical home studio description.
Let's face it, some cymbals sound great. Others are cheap crap and sound like it. The crappy cymbals always sound good on small diaphragm condenser microphones. With the large diaphragm condenser microphones that crappy aspect is simply accentuated and ya get big crappy that no one will really enjoy listening to. And where I prefer the large diaphragm condenser microphones as overheads when I have some height and the drums and cymbals are good. I mean what's the point in using over $100,000 of equipment to record a $300 drum set? Now if there snare drum cost them $300-$500 chances are, you're recording a good drum set. And it will be the best sounding snare drum you've ever heard or, recorded. But most are like trash cans again with drum heads on the trash cans. And the tone? What tone? Oh, that tone. So why don't we just put your wallet on top of the snare drum head and tape it down with some duct tape so it sounds good? And that's the best way to get a good sound from a lousy snare drum. You don't put your money where your mouth is. You put it on the snare drum skin. And you won't gag any. Really I'm not fooling. This is not a gag. Sometimes tuning the drums for the drummer helps, Since they obviously don't know how to tune them properly themselves because most are just dumb drummers. But still... if the shell is lousy, it doesn't matter how well you tune the drums.
A drum set designed for the stage rarely sounds good like that in the studio. Studio drums don't need to be loud and bombastic drums sets. I mean if you are Iron Maiden, Metallica and others, I guess that's what people expect? That doesn't make them easy to record however. The best sounding bass drums I've ever recorded our small bass drums. 18 inches, 20 inches. They look more like floor tom-toms than a bass drum. But it sounded simply huge in the recording. The next guy comes in with a big 24 inch bass drum and it doesn't cut it in the recording. Great for live not just great for recording purposes. Not that we don't get good sounds out of 24 inch bass drums. It just takes a little more effort to get that good sounding. Ya have to have something we call technique. It's not quite a drive through process. Sometimes it just needs more mass. So we actually kept a nice upholstered cinderblock for just such occasions. Sits nicely in the bass drum and doesn't move around a lot LOL. Even if it is a metal drummer with double batters. Don't get any water on the drummer and they won't rust.
While most of my drum recording work involves 57's & 421's had a couple of condenser overheads and/or a condenser microphone on the high at such is the AKG C-451 (with the 10 or 20 db screw in pad on the capsule), Or the SH URE SM 81's, KM 84's by Neumann and you're usually good. But that's when the hi hat plays an important part for that particular band. And even if you don't use it, for a rock 'n roll album project, it wouldn't be unusual to also cut a track of the hi hat. It might not get used? Or it might become useful? But at least you have that decision to make during the mix down process. So I'll generally tell you to put a microphone on everything on the drums and cut all of those tracks even if you don't intend to use all of them. You'll only get better at doing it when ya do it a lot. It's good practice. It's like brushing your teeth in the morning and combing your hair. Don't forget the deodorant! Drummers need a lot of deodorant. And those drummers can really create a stench in that drum booth which is why I generally don't use drum booths. They end up smelling like junior high school boys gym locker rooms. Yuck! And that won't happen when you stick them in the middle of the big room. Lots more air is circulating from the HVAC system LOL. And then not only do they look pretty cool, they don't smell so bad. At least that some of the problems us female engineers have to contend with. We certainly can't expect anything else from our boys... I. mean men. I mean boys. You know what I mean, I think? Phew... ugh.
It's OK if they're stinky as long as their drums sound good. And women of course are attracted to good sounding drums.
Mx. Remy Ann David
RemyRAD, post: 402115 wrote: I always listen to the drum set in
RemyRAD, post: 402115 wrote: I always listen to the drum set in person before I start putting microphones on it even though I have my general established procedures and equipment. When I hear those heavy cymbals that sound like somebody is beating on a trash can lid, that automatically tells me small diaphragm condensers on the overheads. Because I don't like the sound of trashcan like sounding cymbals. So it's really important to listen to the drum set first, in person, in the room in which you want to record them in. But that's also assuming you have the drum set in a decent sounding room. Not a bedroom or a basement. So overhead drum miking is something of a misnomer when dealing with low ceilings. But it's not really overhead microphones. It's microphones for the cymbals and for the drums because you don't have enough height and ya don't have enough room to actually call them overhead microphones. For the most part in the smaller studios the overhead microphones on drums are never much more than 3 feet above the tallest cymbal. That's really not an overhead microphone that's a cymbal microphone. Overhead would presume you have some ceiling height and a fairly large space. And that's not your typical home studio description. Let's face it, some cymbals sound great. Others are cheap crap and sound like it. The crappy cymbals always sound good on small diaphragm condenser microphones. With the large diaphragm condenser microphones that crappy aspect is simply accentuated and ya get big crappy that no one will really enjoy listening to. And where I prefer the large diaphragm condenser microphones as overheads when I have some height and the drums and cymbals are good. I mean what's the point in using over $100,000 of equipment to record a $300 drum set? Now if there snare drum cost them $300-$500 chances are, you're recording a good drum set. And it will be the best sounding snare drum you've ever heard or, recorded. But most are like trash cans again with drum heads on the trash cans. And the tone? What tone? Oh, that tone. So why don't we just put your wallet on top of the snare drum head and tape it down with some duct tape so it sounds good? And that's the best way to get a good sound from a lousy snare drum. You don't put your money where your mouth is. You put it on the snare drum skin. And you won't gag any. Really I'm not fooling. This is not a gag. Sometimes tuning the drums for the drummer helps, Since they obviously don't know how to tune them properly themselves because most are just dumb drummers. But still... if the shell is lousy, it doesn't matter how well you tune the drums. A drum set designed for the stage rarely sounds good like that in the studio. Studio drums don't need to be loud and bombastic drums sets. I mean if you are Iron Maiden, Metallica and others, I guess that's what people expect? That doesn't make them easy to record however. The best sounding bass drums I've ever recorded our small bass drums. 18 inches, 20 inches. They look more like floor tom-toms than a bass drum. But it sounded simply huge in the recording. The next guy comes in with a big 24 inch bass drum and it doesn't cut it in the recording. Great for live not just great for recording purposes. Not that we don't get good sounds out of 24 inch bass drums. It just takes a little more effort to get that good sounding. Ya have to have something we call technique. It's not quite a drive through process. Sometimes it just needs more mass. So we actually kept a nice upholstered cinderblock for just such occasions. Sits nicely in the bass drum and doesn't move around a lot LOL. Even if it is a metal drummer with double batters. Don't get any water on the drummer and they won't rust. While most of my drum recording work involves 57's & 421's had a couple of condenser overheads and/or a condenser microphone on the high at such is the AKG C-451 (with the 10 or 20 db screw in pad on the capsule), Or the SH URE SM 81's, KM 84's by Neumann and you're usually good. But that's when the hi hat plays an important part for that particular band. And even if you don't use it, for a rock 'n roll album project, it wouldn't be unusual to also cut a track of the hi hat. It might not get used? Or it might become useful? But at least you have that decision to make during the mix down process. So I'll generally tell you to put a microphone on everything on the drums and cut all of those tracks even if you don't intend to use all of them. You'll only get better at doing it when ya do it a lot. It's good practice. It's like brushing your teeth in the morning and combing your hair. Don't forget the deodorant! Drummers need a lot of deodorant. And those drummers can really create a stench in that drum booth which is why I generally don't use drum booths. They end up smelling like junior high school boys gym locker rooms. Yuck! And that won't happen when you stick them in the middle of the big room. Lots more air is circulating from the HVAC system LOL. And then not only do they look pretty cool, they don't smell so bad. At least that some of the problems us female engineers have to contend with. We certainly can't expect anything else from our boys... I. mean men. I mean boys. You know what I mean, I think? Phew... ugh. It's OK if they're stinky as long as their drums sound good. And women of course are attracted to good sounding drums. Mx. Remy Ann David
That's brutal (LOL). I'm sure there are no rules to dictate what mics make a viable overhead mic? What certifies a room that is not a overhead mic contender?
where's remy been? i talked to her over the phone last year, and
where's remy been? i talked to her over the phone last year, and know the deal. strange not seeing over-detailed posts from an efficienado. i miss it.
hehe, Glad I'm not reading this stuff at breakfast anymore lol.
i'm east coast usa, so given the time zones, your reading common man hour posts right? for engineers/musicians?
what is it, people not willing to make good tracking rooms anymore? i'm ok w. that just replace. now it's just a mix room, not easy.
seriously tho, what happened w/ the remy situation? something happened. what was it?
Ustas, post: 401991 wrote: I apologize for the bad English. I'm
Ustas, post: 401991 wrote: I apologize for the bad English. I'm not talking about the noise, I was talking about nose. And also, I'm not a great expert veterinary and dog food. At home I have a cat. But. Let's go back to talking on the overhead: anybody listen to these tracks or have reload it? To my regret, WAW files is not available for me. Maybe after the middle of april... Upload to soundcloud - [[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Mihstep's sounds on SoundCloud - Hear the world[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Mihstep's sounds on SoundCloud - Hear the world[/]
((HEY)) Those tracks can be the scratch tracks for Michael Jackson Billie Jean , all that's lacking is the strainer top end (LOL). I like it
BassLiK, post: 406918 wrote: ((HEY)) Those tracks can be the sc
BassLiK, post: 406918 wrote: ((HEY)) Those tracks can be the scratch tracks for Michael Jackson Billie Jean , all that's lacking is the strainer top end (LOL). I like it
this link has 4 pairs of different microphones and 3 different drum pattern
What number do you prefer?
well, maybe for each pattern - each mic?
The title of this thread is "what would you recommend for OH dru
The title of this thread is "what would you recommend for OH drum mics". It doesn't specify a budget.
Accordingly, the Behringer is not the best choice for OH drum mics. Actually, it's not even close to being a good choice. Perhaps if someone's total mic budget was $59, it might fit the bill.
I understand that you like yours, (I see you've posted your preference for it in another thread here as well) and that's fine... But no professional here on RO would ever consider it to be a "good" OH drum mic; in fact, we wouldn't even consider it to be a "fair" SD for OH's... I wouldn't even consider it worthy of home/hobby recording.
It's cheap, harsh, brittle and noisy... in short, it's worth exactly what it costs. And this is exactly what I told one of my clients last year when they bought one and wanted to record percussion with it. It took me all of about 30 seconds of listening to it to tell him to return it and get his money back.
And not for nothin', but you're also replying to a thread where the last post was over a year ago. ;)
Ditto. Unless you like the extreme metalic clank most cymbals ar
Ditto. Unless you like the extreme metalic clank most cymbals are capable of then this isn't a good,fair, or usable mic. Not for overheads. Ever. I will say that I did use one on a plywood box guitar once and it was a sound unlike anything else and if thats what you look for then by all means get a pair. The fact that they are a reverse engineered copy of a VERY great mic (Earthworks M50) shouldn't sway anyones opinion. Really. The only part that is decent is the casing.
All that said earthworks mics would be the last place I would go
All that said earthworks mics would be the last place I would go for a drum kit overhead, in most cases. Earthworks mics that'd I've heard/used were un exciting, and clinical on drum kit. Those mics have they're place, and uses, but you won't see them above many kits Ill ever mic.
That's it, I will need to dig up for my old [[url=http://[/URL]=
That's it, I will need to dig up for my old [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.behringe…"]Behringer[/]="http://www.behringe…"]Behringer[/] ECM8000 and make an opinion by myself.
It's not a good reference mic to begin with and I never used it to record.
I'll make some tests and share my opinion about it ;)
Davedog, post: 421798, member: 4495 wrote: The fact that they ar
Davedog, post: 421798, member: 4495 wrote: The fact that they are a reverse engineered copy of a VERY great mic ([[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.earthwor…"]Earthworks[/]="http://www.earthwor…"]Earthworks[/] M50) shouldn't sway anyones opinion.
I thought the ET M50 was mostly used for analysis...?...
I've never used them for OH's. Most of the time my #1 go-to for that array is two AKG 414's.
HA! I never said that the Earthworks is a mic I would use as an
HA! I never said that the Earthworks is a mic I would use as an overhead. It is the reverse engineered sample for the B^@ger ECM mic that was mentioned as an overhead mic...which it most assuredly does NOT excel at. And to qualify...the Earthworks M50 is one of the best mics in the world at what it does.
Unless you like the extreme metalic clank most cymbals are capab
Unless you like the extreme metalic clank most cymbals are capable of then this isn't a good,fair, or usablemic. Not for overheads. Ever.
For sure dd, my comment was aimed at one of my buddies who always try's to convince me they can sound good in oh lol.
+1 on them being excellent at what they do.
I heard they were made with such an accurate extended response to record like the earths movement or earthworms or something ... I dunno bout all that but it's seemed to make some sense at the time.
The most surprising mic that's good on oh is a 57, I did out of necessity one time and was pretty happy w the track. Took a lot of the crap room out of it by nature.
I wish I had access to more mics to try out for overheads, besid
I wish I had access to more mics to try out for overheads, besides what I started out with, which were C1000's. original NT1's, rode Nt5's. But now I use the ksm32's, and I did hear comparison of the KSm32's to the U87's and I was sold on the ksm32's. Truly a great mic on many sources.
Yeah, I can compare a U87 and a KSM32, they are both condenser m
Yeah, I can compare a U87 and a KSM32, they are both condenser mics. End of comparaison ! ;)
I have a 32 and find it to be a very good mic. I have no doubt they do an excellent job on overheads. But I try to buy mics that I can use for more than one application. I bought the ksm32 a long time ago and I always found it a bit nazal for vocal that I tried it on.
I bought 2 KSM44 instead that have more flatering HF and less nazal tone. On overheads, acoustic guitars and vocal, they get used more often.
pcrecord, post: 430242, member: 46460 wrote: I bought the ksm32
pcrecord, post: 430242, member: 46460 wrote: I bought the ksm32 a long time ago and I always found it a bit nazal for vocal that I tried it on.
And that's the thing about mics - even quality mics - past the specs and overall quality, what sounds great on one vocalist doesn't necessarily flatter another.
The KSM32 and the U87 are both condensers, both nice mics. I don't think that the 32 sounds as good on everything as the U87 tends to, but I don't think it sounds bad, either.
I own a U87, and for me, I don't like it on my own voice as much as I do my 414EB, or, for that matter, my Neumann U89. Both of these mics sound better to me on my voice than my U87 does.
( on a personal note, I find the U87 to be overpriced, but I won't deny that it's a good mic, and an industry standard as well) And as Marco said, it also greatly depends on the application.
But these are all still very good mics in general. Whereas with cheap mics ... say, for example, an AT 2020... sounds consistently bad on pretty much everything. ;)
BassLiK, post: 430228, member: 41056 wrote: I wish I had access
BassLiK, post: 430228, member: 41056 wrote: I wish I had access to more mics to try out for overheads, besides what I started out with, which were C1000's. original NT1's, rode Nt5's. But now I use the ksm32's, and I did hear comparison of the KSm32's to the U87's and I was sold on the ksm32's. Truly a great mic on many sources.
pcrecord, post: 430242, member: 46460 wrote: Yeah, I can compare a U87 and a KSM32, they are both condenser mics. End of comparaison ! ;)
I have a 32 and find it to be a very good mic. I have no doubt they do an excellent job on overheads. But I try to buy mics that I can use for more than one application. I bought the ksm32 a long time ago and I always found it a bit nazal for vocal that I tried it on.
I bought 2 KSM44 instead that have more flatering HF and less nazal tone. On overheads, acoustic guitars and vocal, they get used more often.
This cat does an amazing job for many applications indeed for the KSM32. Yea I know the marriage between the vocalist and vocal mics do render divorces really quick.
Why don't you use soundcloud?
Why don't you use soundcloud?