|
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | What's a good mic for sticking in front of the sound hole? I was told get a condensor mic.
Which one? any suggestions? mostly for live performances if that makes a difference but it would b3e nice if it recorded well too. If not I'll have to get one of each and what then? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2002
Posts: 8307
Location: Tennessee | It's not a condensor mic, but it's hard to go wrong with a Shure SM57. Cheap, industructible, and used on stage and in studios everywhere. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2008
Posts: 74
Location: Agawam MA | Ditto,
I have 2 of those that are still going strong after 30 years.
God bless,
Steve |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 5563
Location: Blue Ridge Mountains | Shure SM57
+2 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | And much better in a live situation. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 5575
Location: big island | the only thing about using vocal mics for guitar is that you need to stay fairly still. if you move around much while playing the listeners will hear your volume dropping in and out. small diaphragm condensers (pencil mics) work best. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Not anymore. The 57 was good in it's day but that was just because condenser mikes were stupidly expensive by comparison. Times have changed and now really good condenser mikes are readily available and very afforable.
Bill, check your email. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 5575
Location: big island | paul, what does your "not anymore" refer to? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | It was in response to Bobbo's "it's hard to go wrong with a 57" That was the case for decades, but there's a ton of better (and cheaper) product out there now. The microphone market is incredibly competitive. Shure had it sown up for a long time, but those days are long gone. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 3145
Location: Marlton, NJ | Paul - what would you recommend in the same price range as the Shure? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2006
Posts: 6992
Location: Jet City | I have a MXL 990 which is cheap and seems to get a much better sound for both vocals and guitar than the 57 I had. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2004
Posts: 777
Location: East Wenatchee, WA | I bought a pair of AT2020's that are cheap and do a great job. Not as good in a live situation I think, as they feedback more than my dynamic mic's.
With my old EV's and amp it wasn't much of an issue, but with the Bose L1 PAS, they don't like condensers as much. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by CrimsonLake:
Paul - what would you recommend in the same price range as the Shure? For about a hundred bucks you can get an Audio Techica AT2020, which is a superb large diaphragm condenser microphone. There are ton of others. Some of the lesser known brands are amazing. There is one particular Taiwanese factory that produces OEM under a ton of off-brand names and they are killer.
It's horses for courses. If I wanted to mic a guitar amp or a snare drum I'd use an SM57. For acoustic instruments dynamic mics do not have the sensitivity or frequency response. Condenser mics, large or small diapragm are fine live, as long as the sound engineer is up to the job.
By the way JD, a large diaphragm condenser in front of an L1 is probably a little ambitious. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Edit: double-post |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Thanks Paul, No email yet but I'll look into the 2020 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | For acoustic guitar in a live stiuation the AT3031 would be a better bet. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 1553
Location: Indiana | 2 more cents.
Paul's right. You do still see plenty of 57's in studio use... but mostly for snare and cab micing.
Not acoustic instruments.
A condenser is the way to go and, again, as Paul said, the choices are plentiful today.
My recommendation would be a small diaphragm condenser. Look for a matched pair if you want to play around with stereo placing. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 2120
Location: Chicago | Anyone ever work with an AKG? When I'm not using my Zoom H4 I use an AKG C3000B that gives good sound. Here is a demo I shared with Moody P.I.: It's the unplugged "Lullaby" from My "Social" Page Playslit. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | I have 6 AKG 414's. By far my favourite microphone ever. Amazingly versatile but stupidly expensive by current standards, but you get what you pay for. For live work the AKG C1000S used to be one of the best small diaphragm back-electrets, bet then Rode came along with the NT3 and kicked it's ass. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 1553
Location: Indiana | NT3 would be a great choice. So is the workhorse C1000.
Problem with large D's like the C3000 and AT2020, especially since Bill mentioned live performance, is low end feedback. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | AEA R84 but not cheap. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 2491
Location: Copenhagen Denmark | An AKG 1000 is nearly perfect , however , it `s phantompower can be derived from a battery incorporated in it`s own housing , causing it to sound " sterile " , with phantom -power fed from a mixing -console , things " warm -up " more , as it is , TWO (2 ) mics. , can make a better overall sound.
On stage use , for amplifying acoustic guitar , the following are rather successfull :
The Best !! ( imho ) attachable to any ACOUSTIC guitar :
http://www.seelectronics.com/GM10.html
You `d be surprised how well it works , and comfortable too !
Next , for anything and everything , the most neutral mic. of all :
http://www.akg.com/site/products/powerslave,id,262,pid,262,nodeid,2...
Vic
..I still have not discovered how to post pictures , so you `ll have to make do with links , Sorry ... :) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2005
Posts: 1320
Location: Round Rock, TX | I like the Rode NT5 small condenser. You can get a matched pair off eBay in the $200-250 price range |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2008
Posts: 2336
Location: Brighty in Blighty | Surely condensor mics are known to be the best mics for acoustic guitar. Perhaps a matched pair of Rode NT1As (large diaphram) or a small diaphram AKG C1000s. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | The C1000 is not a true condenser mic. It's a back-electret design meaning that the capacitor (condenser) is charged at manufacture. This charge will weaken over time and eventually dissipate completely, making the mic useless unless the capsule is replaced. It can take a long time to do this but I know of a few cases where this has happened to C1000s and SM87's. True condensers are externaly biased, which means the capsule is charged from their power supply each time they are used, and don't suffer from this. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | SO it looks like AKG 414 is first choice, AT3031 is second and NT3 is third. I get that right? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 3969
| I have an MXL 990 like Damon, but I find it's better suited to vocals. For the guitar I use a matched pair of Behringer C2's. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Beal, the only problem with the AKG 414s is that most agree the new ones aren't nearly as good as the older versions.
I'm betting all of Temps are old and the desirable versions. The problem if I understand it correctly is that it is really hard to tell the difference just by looking at them.
Maybe I am full of it and Temp will set me straight but I have heard this repeatedly over the last 4-5 years. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | The 414 is a great studio mike but it's overkill for acoustic guitar in a live situation. I have several versions, including a couple of early ones and some brand new. The older ones sound different to the new ones, but different doesn't mean better or worse, just different. "They don't make 'em like they used to" gets heard about everything, and the inference that older means better is not neccesarily the case.
Bill, either the AT3031 or Rode NT3 will be fine, my choice would be the NT3, but check your email first. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Thanks for clearing that up Paul.
I have never owned any 414s so that's why I deferred my comments to you.
I know I am way out of the majority but I still like a ribbon mic for recording acoustics. Gives such a nice warm vibe. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | ribbon mics make EVERYTHING sound better
I prefer neumamn condensors.
I have an akg 414 notice that there are several versions of this one now. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Yep, if you can afford them Ribbons are the way to go for some studio applications, especially acoustic instruments and vocals. Wouldn't use a ribbon mike live though and the vintage ones are way too fragile for anything loud.
There are some cheap ribbon mikes around now of Chinese origin and the ones I've heard were pretty nasty. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 3145
Location: Marlton, NJ | How would you mike a guitar with double epaulets(no center sound hole)? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2005
Posts: 1320
Location: Round Rock, TX | I recently bought some ribbons from a company called Cascade. I got the Fathead II's. Made in the U.S., you get two matched mics, shockmounts and a Blumlein bar for under 4 bills. I'll let you know how they sound soon.
As for mic'ing double epaulets, I use two Rode NT5's with a double mic stand adapter and point each of the mics at one of the epaulets. Sounds pretty dang bueno. Haven't done that live, though, since all my guitars that have d.e.'s also have a preamp. ;) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by CrimsonLake:
How would you mike a guitar with double epaulets(no center sound hole)? Doesn't matter where the soundholes are, the trick is to keep the mikes away from the soundholes or all you'll get is a big nasty woofy bass. That said, this is less of a problem with multi-hole guitars than with centre holes
Soundholes are just a port to tune the fundamental frequency of the soundbox, so if you mic the hole, that's what you'll hear. And, the proximity effect of a cardioid pattern mic will just exagerate that further.
The biggest mistake in recording acoustic guitar is placing the mics too close to the instument. Have somebody play a guitar with the soundhole of a guitar a couple of inches from your ear. Do you like that sound? Didn't think so. Get some good mic preamps and get a bit of distance into the sound.
On stage it's a different ball game, you need to get in close for volume and isolation. I try to place the mike between the bridge and soundhole angled towards the end of the fingerboard, or at the neck joint angled towards the end of the fingerboard to avoid bass woof from the hole. And if the mic has bass roll-off switches I use them, if not I hit the HPF on the channel strip. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | I've had "good" results using a pair of mics, one about 2 feet from the guitar at my eye level pointed slightloy downward. The other around 1 foot from the guitar pointed at the fretboard around the 14th fret.
Temp is the best source of sound advice. Us that as a start and be prepared for a lot of trial and error.
Toby |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Exactly. That's what I mean by getting some distance in there. Let the tone of the thing breathe a little. The real sound of a guitar develops several feet away from it, so placing microphones within inches of the soundboard is not giving a true picture. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by wilblee:
Made in the U.S., you get two matched mics, shockmounts and a Blumlein bar I'm intrigued by this. The Blumlein array goes back to the 1930's and is a very elegant and sophisticated stereo technique that uses a crossed pair of bi-directional microphones. Other than live orchestral or acoustic ensemble recording recording it has little use in modern studio techniques. I wonder why they've chosen to include that. It's such an esoteric technique I'd be surprised if anyone but experienced (by that I mean OLD) pro recording engineers were even aware of it. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by Gallerinski:
Temp is the best source of sound advice.
Toby To clarify, thats "Advice about sound" My advice on ANY other subject is far from sound. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | AEA makes some pretty nice and affordable ribbons.
I have a R84 and am very pleased with the sound.
I also have a Peluso Ribbon but I haven't found the time to play around with it enough to know if I like it a lot or not.
For stereo condensers, I use a matched set of Oktavas with the interchangeable head capsules. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 2491
Location: Copenhagen Denmark | When it comes to RIBBONS , make sure it has :
A ) transformer
or..
B ) An amp. circuit ( preferable incorporating a valve ) to adapt to higher impedance.
A ribbon mic. has a low output of some milli -volts. and low impedance 0,02 ohm , inductance/ nano henry..
Therefore needs correction..
..I do n`t even know what I`m doin` here , perhaps IFFY can ( I`m SURE ) explain it better..
Vic
..bunch of amateurs...!! :mad:
On second note , where is Mr. Ovation ?? , He would know..( allthough ALPEP did point the way !! ) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
Originally posted by wilblee:
Made in the U.S., you get two matched mics, shockmounts and a Blumlein bar I'm intrigued by this. The Blumlein array goes back to the 1930's and is a very elegant and sophisticated stereo technique that uses a crossed pair of bi-directional microphones. Other than live orchestral or acoustic ensemble recording recording it has little use in modern studio techniques. I wonder why they've chosen to include that. It's such an esoteric technique I'd be surprised if anyone but experienced (by that I mean OLD) pro recording engineers were even aware of it.
studio no but live it works fine |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | See, it's just us old guys who know this stuff. The Blumlein array was one of the techniques, along with Mid/Side that was part of the sound engineering & music production degree program I taught a few years ago. It's a really cool way to make live recordings. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2005
Posts: 4028
Location: Utah | This site has some good info on recording acoustic guitars and using different techniques, including Blumlein Array and mid-side. Click on the home page link to get their detailed discussions on different mics. |
|
| |
OT; mic for acoustic