Micing room for stereo, need some advice on mics!!

Discussion in 'Microphones (live or studio)' started by DaperDan, Feb 23, 2006.

  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

  1. DaperDan

    DaperDan Guest

    I own a venue and I am recording the shows right now by tracking each instrument. Its working, just too much bleed to get that great recording. The room sounds amazing so I want to record the stage area and the mix that with the vocals. Im looking at these two mics..just kinda wanted to see if anyone on here has anything bad or good to say about these two mics.

    Shure SM81 Condenser Mic
    Blue BLUEBIRD Large Diaphragm Cardioid Condenser Microphone

    The Dan
  2. amishsixstringer

    amishsixstringer Member

    Feb 22, 2006
    You will NOT be unhappy with the SM81's. I would have suggested them to you had you not mentioned them. Those would be great.
  3. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Member

    Sep 26, 2005
    Unfortunatley the "Amish" dude is onlt half right. I own 4 SM81s and have since 1978 and lovem' alot but YOU WILL NOT, REPEAT NOT BE HAPPY WITH EITHER OF THE MICS YOU ARE INQUIRING ABOUT! iF YOU ARE GETTING "TOO MUCH BLEED" NOW. It'll get worse with those "wide banded" condensor mics. You should be using Shure SM57/58 cardioids or better still the Beta 57/58 "super cardioids" or other dynamic equivelents like AUDIX, Sennheiser MD421s, etc.. Dynamic mics are a narrower banwidth mic and will give you MAXIMUM protection from "bleed" with greater isolation. You won't get as much hi and low slop either, that's ferShure! Those mics you're looking at are "STUDIO" mics and are best used as such. Good Dynamic mics are great for recording, condensor mics just really aren't nesassary for live "pop" recording except maybe for drum overheads. Even in fine arts recording good dynamic mics are still quite good with choirs and such.

    I've specialized in live recording throughout most of my career and bleed can definatley be good if you know how to use it to your advantage. So, not sure why you're not getting acceptable results. I usually tell people if they want "separation", they should see a lawyer.

    Emmy and Soul Train music award nominations for live recording.
    Ms. Remy Ann David
  4. amishsixstringer

    amishsixstringer Member

    Feb 22, 2006
    He wants to mic the stage in stereo, thus picking up the entire band, and then use a descrete track for the vocals to blend in more or less. In that case an SM57 would be horrible. The wider cardiod condensor would be best, espically for picking up crowd sounds as well.
  5. Cucco

    Cucco Distinguished Member

    Mar 8, 2004
    Tacoma, WA
    Yup, I think you might have misread his post Remy.

    He's moving away from individual mic'ing and going to a live-to-2-track rig but supplementing with vocal spots.

    In that case, the 81 will be a fine choice. For "real" live - stereo recordings (a la symphonic works, choral, etc.) I would avoid them like the plague - but for bands (acoustic, rock, country, etc.) they would be on the top of my list. Overall, they are relatively accurate (though, in my ears, a tad bright and aggressive) but most importantly, they're built like brick sh*t houses!

    My second choice would be the Rode NT5...scratch that, they would actually be my first choice and the SM81s fall back to second place.

  6. DaperDan

    DaperDan Guest

    amishsixstringer and cucco are exactly right. The room sounds amazing and i have a cheap condenser mic as a room mic right now, and I can almost get better recording using that and the vocal mics, then by tracking each instrument, especially the drums, and that room mic pics up the vocals as well, making them extra muddy even with the vocal track mixed over. Im going to try to mic the stage area first so the FOH speakers dont get into the mix then lay the vocals down center with the two conderser mics running stereo. I will let you know how it works.

    The Dan!!

Share This Page