I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
to praise properly.

I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
"Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Thanks,

Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Bob Cain wrote:
I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Sennheiser e855 would be one of my first tries, since your goal
is to keep leakage down and get an isolated vocal.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Bob Cain wrote:

looking for a cost effective (good bang for the buck) dual use,
stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she is using but I'm not all
that pleased with it. I'm tending toward a condenser but could be
talked out of that. I see plenty in the $250 and above range but for
starters I'd like to find something less expensive. Any suggestions
appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must. Stage monitors
can probably be placed near or in the null cone of a super or hyper
cardiod.


Audio Techinca AE5400 is out of your budget.
Scott already mentioned the E855

Used Sennheiser MD431?
Audix OM5 or OM6?

Hey BC,

All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp

-bg-

--
www.thelittlecanadaheadphoneband.ca
www.lchb.ca


"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...

I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
to praise properly.

I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
"Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Thanks,

Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Bob Cain wrote:

sorry to snip

Low handling noise

?

You'll be hard pressed to get a studio quality recording when the mic is
hand held IMHO.

and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time. EV RE-11 for example.

Good luck with your project.


Graham

Pooh Bear wrote:

good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their back end towards the front row.

"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...
...I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Bob,

We've used Shure Beta 87A the last two years for just this. Male (growly
baritone) and female (resonant alto/2nd soprano) vocals, excellent GBF
(supercardioid), very open, clear sound, with good texture. Proximity
easily manipulated, they take EQ well, and are very rugged - classic Shure.
Priced at $250, but you can find them for less.

We've compared them lots of times off and on to other live SR mics -- the
Neumann KMS105 had much worse stage wash, I think those are best with IEM,
plus they were very difficult to use proximity for male voice; and also have
compared to several Audix OM dynamics - not enough "body" in these to suit
us. We keep coming back to the Beta 87A. They record well directly from
the mixer, you can get really close to them and get very little bleed.

Steve

The best mic solution will be free for you.
Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
investment in a good mic by her.

Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
listen with the help of your ears.
She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
must also be partially hers.

Rich

"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.


I've gotten good results with an AKG 535EB in both live/studio situations and
they're about $230 new. It's worth trying out on the singer before purchasing,
but you already know that.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

Rich Peet wrote:

The best mic solution will be free for you.
Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
investment in a good mic by her.

Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
listen with the help of your ears.
She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
must also be partially hers.

I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
think many of us would agree with that.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Depends on her voice, of course, but in that approximate price range my
first grab would be for a Beyer M260.

Peace,
Paul

"**bg**" wrote in news:yuaXc.206601
$M95.156594@pd7tw1no:

Hey BC,

All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp

-bg-

Why?

Bob,
I've worked stages for years using the AKG535. Very nice vocal mic.
It will have a lot of presence and clarity. You'll find it's nice for
acoustic guitar in the studio. I've not recorded vocals using the 535.
Gary Gordon
Bob Cain wrote:
I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
to praise properly.

I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
"Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Thanks,

Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Actually it presumes only that the vocalist must control the texture of her
sounds that are being captured and the only way to insure that is for the
vocalist to control by ownership the microphone used. The additional
advantage is that the vocalist will not need to learn more than once the
sensitivity of the microphone or its responses to various ways of being
handled. The recording and production should and will stay with those
people.

She will need your help in hearing the differences of different microphones
as she will have no way to judge the shortcommings of different makes.

Rich

"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...


Rich Peet wrote:

The best mic solution will be free for you.
Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
investment in a good mic by her.

Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
listen with the help of your ears.
She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the
sound
must also be partially hers.

I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
think many of us would agree with that.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Pooh Bear wrote in message ...
Bob Cain wrote:

sorry to snip

Low handling noise

?

You'll be hard pressed to get a studio quality recording when the mic is
hand held IMHO.

and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time. EV RE-11 for example.

Good luck with your project.


Hypercards can be difficult, but if used right, can also be the best
choice. However, I'm a bigger fan of supercardioid pattern, for two
reasons:

1. Smaller lobe in the back, thus easier to use in most situation, and
2. Wider lobe in the front makes for an easier mic to "work".

The two mics I'd suggest, that both give a pretty big "bang for the
buck" are the Sennheiser e865 and the AKG C535. I know the 865 is a
supercardioid, but I'm not sure about the AKG. Both are condenser mics
and will generally give much better detail than any dynamic mic.

YMMV

Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:46:34 GMT, Rich Peet
wrote:
Actually it presumes only that the vocalist must control the texture of her
sounds that are being captured and the only way to insure that is for the
vocalist to control by ownership the microphone used. The additional
advantage is that the vocalist will not need to learn more than once the
sensitivity of the microphone or its responses to various ways of being
handled. The recording and production should and will stay with those
people.

She will need your help in hearing the differences of different microphones
as she will have no way to judge the shortcommings of different makes.


Some vocalists (okay, most . .) are headcases. I'm aware of at least
one soundman who's become quite skilled at retrofitting his preferred
condensor capsule into things like SM-58s, Beta58s . . whatever the
singer "insists" is what s/he needs for "his/her sound."

Bob Cain wrote in message ...
...I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

A used Sennheiser MD-431 (four THIRTY-one) would fit within your
budget. It's a great mic for both the stage and studio.

**bg** wrote:

All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp

Why? When I bought my first round of mics intended for vox I bought 4
Beyer M500's just to avoid the SM58. That was over thrity years ago and
I have never regretted the decision. Yes, I have many times met and
dealt with SM58's, but I see no reason to prefer them or inflict them
onto any particular vocalist. They work well to cut through in some
situations with some material, but all around I'd never suggest them as
a general purpose vocal mic.

--
ha

Pooh Bear wrote:

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

--
ha

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

So all of the thousands of concerts in which hypercard vocal mics have been
used effectively with stage monitors by people who are aware of the patterns of
the mics as well as the wedges were invalid? Somehow I've managed to not have
them squeal unexpectedly at all, so I must be doing something wrong.


Scott Fraser

ScotFraser wrote:
True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.


So all of the thousands of concerts in which hypercard vocal mics have been
used effectively with stage monitors by people who are aware of the patterns of
the mics as well as the wedges were invalid?

Besides, the null of a super/hypercardioid can often reject spill from the adjacent floor wedge--something a cardioid will never do.

Bob Cain wrote:

Rich Peet wrote:

The best mic solution will be free for you.
Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
investment in a good mic by her.

Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
listen with the help of your ears.
She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
must also be partially hers.

I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
think many of us would agree with that.

I find Rich's suggestion little different than myself choosing my own
guitar; nobody can know more about how that singer wants to sound than
the singer herself. Onstage her voice plus that mic is most of her
instrument. Let her pick it.

--
ha

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .

I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
think many of us would agree with that.

I find Rich's suggestion little different than myself choosing my own
guitar; nobody can know more about how that singer wants to sound than
the singer herself. Onstage her voice plus that mic is most of her
instrument. Let her pick it.

Okay -- but let her pick it based on what a recording sounds like, *not*
what it sounds like while she's singing through it. Bone conduction means
she has little idea what it really sounds like out front.

Peace,
Paul

Paul Stamler wrote:

Okay -- but let her pick it based on what a recording sounds like, *not*
what it sounds like while she's singing through it. Bone conduction means
she has little idea what it really sounds like out front.


Now, a mic salesman would just give her headphones, flip the polarity
and show her how much warmer it sounds, and maybe sell the preamp along
with it.

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:42:58 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):


I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
to praise properly.

I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
"Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Thanks,

Bob


Bob,

Pry that wallet open a little farther and try an AE5400 from Audio Technica.
When you use it live, put the high pass filter on and let her get lips on.

No ****. Try it.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Kurt Albershardt wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their back end towards the front row.

Great in principle - until the vocalist holding the mic moves it around - total nightmare. Squealarama !


Graham

hank alrich wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
handheld and its positioning therefore variable.


Graham

**bg** wrote:

Hey BC,

All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp


To discover how bad / over-rated it is ?


Graham

hank alrich wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:


True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.


This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

What you want to do is have the monitors in the null cone of
a beyond-cardiod mic. It would be very cool to have a mic
that projected that cone, for example with laser light, out
and away from it so that you could actuall see what's in the
cone. A beyond-cardiod gives you a spot on either front
side of the mic that would be in that cone.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Pooh Bear wrote:
hank alrich wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
handheld and its positioning therefore variable.

No, this problem is entirely the result of a vocalist who doesn't know
not to point the mike directly away from the monitors. In a touring
situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:
hank alrich wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time.

This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
handheld and its positioning therefore variable.

No, this problem is entirely the result of a vocalist who doesn't know
not to point the mike directly away from the monitors.

I hear you !

In a touring
situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.

Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.

Jagger for example ?

Graham

Ty Ford wrote:


Bob,

Pry that wallet open a little farther and try an AE5400 from Audio Technica.
When you use it live, put the high pass filter on and let her get lips on.

No ****. Try it.

Thanks, Ty. There is no doubt that would be my first
choice. Anything you rate as highly as you consistently
have that mic and that costs that little (compared to your
usual recommendations) has high potential indeed.
Unfortunately prying my wallet open farther won't reveal any
more money. Times are really rough for me right now.

I am, OTOH, actively trying to find someone to back this gal
and her band with an investment toward better gear. If that
should develop, the AE5400 is a given and she will own it.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Pooh Bear
Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time. EV RE-11 for example.


This is why I teach the new guys that generally hypercardiods (like a Beta
87) work well when you have *2* wedges angled in at a singer, and a cardiod
(like a Beta 58) better matches a single monitor paradigm. And often at work
there is no eq around to ring out monitors either, so this is an important
consideration.

Other affordable mics I'd consider for vocals besides the Senn MD431 and
Beyer M500 would be the Beyer M69 and M88 - very nice mics, and of course a
Sennheiser MD421. An MD409 wokrs for many voices up close, and you might try
the newer (and cheap) MD609 too, it's a similar design.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their
back end towards the front row.

Great in principle - until the vocalist holding the mic moves it around -
total nightmare. Squealarama !


Did you know there are people who are trained in the profession of running
sound systems who can actually set system gain & equalization so that these
feedback problems don't occur?

Scott Fraser

Pooh Bear wrote:

In a touring
situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.

Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.

Depends on how the monitors are laid out. And yeah, careful monitor layout
is more of a big deal.

Jagger for example ?

The Stones have actually been using in-ear monitoring since before the
Steel Wheels tour, mostly because they are all so deaf. They each have
major monitor equalization to compensate for their particular hearing deficits.
This makes it a whole lot easier to deal with this sort of thing; there is
a lot of drum wash and amp noise coming from the back of the stage but there
are no wedges except for emergency backup.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:08:37 -0400, Bob Cain wrote
(in article ):



Ty Ford wrote:


Bob,

Pry that wallet open a little farther and try an AE5400 from Audio
Technica.
When you use it live, put the high pass filter on and let her get lips on.

No ****. Try it.

Thanks, Ty. There is no doubt that would be my first
choice. Anything you rate as highly as you consistently
have that mic and that costs that little (compared to your
usual recommendations) has high potential indeed.
Unfortunately prying my wallet open farther won't reveal any
more money. Times are really rough for me right now.

I am, OTOH, actively trying to find someone to back this gal
and her band with an investment toward better gear. If that
should develop, the AE5400 is a given and she will own it.


Bob


Is an MD431 in the budget? I forget the price.

Someone mentioned the M260. The original yes, but not the current m260.80,
please.

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

In article writes:

In a touring
situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.

Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.
Jagger for example ?

Jagger doesn't perform without rehearsals and sound checks, at least
not since the days when feedback was a symbol of power.

I've seen singer crouch right over a wedge monitor and not have
feedback, but in order to do that, both the singer and the monitor
engineer need to be on the ball.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

Unfortunately prying my wallet open farther won't reveal any
more money. Times are really rough for me right now.

I am, OTOH, actively trying to find someone to back this gal
and her band with an investment toward better gear. If that
should develop, the AE5400 is a given and she will own it.

Why not suggest that she purchase one (assuming that it really works
for her voice and stage technique)? What does it cost? The pay from
one or two gigs? It sounds like a good investment to me.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article ospam writes:

This is why I teach the new guys that generally hypercardiods (like a Beta
87) work well when you have *2* wedges angled in at a singer, and a cardiod
(like a Beta 58) better matches a single monitor paradigm.

While this seems sensible when you look at the pictures, I find that
it doesn't really work in practice. Mics and monitors are generally
far enough apart so that nulls are no longer effective in preventing
feedback. It works when you're very close to the monitors but unless
the singer is crawling on the stage floor, the best reason to use an
directional mic is to reduce leakage from other things on stage.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

I've seen singer crouch right over a wedge monitor and not have
feedback, but in order to do that, both the singer and the monitor
engineer need to be on the ball.

And when I mixed Thomas Mapfumo at the Barbican in London he was in the habit
of standing right in front of the stage right mains & leaning his head into the
stack while singing, facing into the stack!
No feedback, and a hypercardioid mic.


Scott Fraser