| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mic + mic preamp advice
Hi,
Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 22, 10:18*am, "
wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. *So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). *Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). *Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). *I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. *If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. Many people are of the opinion that mic choice is critical, a deal breaker. If you want a tidal wave of firm opinions, often based on nothing but reading other people's opinions, try http://www.gearslutz.com or practically any other recording forum. I have this silly idea that most decent mics are _fairly_ similar in their sound quality. To a seasoned pro who has heard hundreds of mics on thousands of sources, the differences are significant, perhaps even critical, but to most of us, if the frequency response is reasonably flat and reasonable extended and both distortion and noise are low, the recording will sound a lot like _the sound waves at the point where the mic was placed_. I have some mic comparisons that I attempted to do fairly carefully, with some attention to level matching and with the same performance for all the mics. Two of the mics are LD, two are SD, they range in price from $150 to $1500+: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...ur-more-clips/ Are the differences in these clips enough to change the artistic impact of the performance? The second part of your question hits at one of the most significant things I learned while trying to figure out audio recording as an amateur. There's a ton of bad advice out there saying levels should be "as high as possible without clipping" or some such. In fact, the switch from analog and dBVU to digital and dBFS resulted in a whole new metering system. Depending on system calibration 0 dBVU is around -18 dBFS, and that is where the RMS levels of your recordings should be aimed. This will give peaks around -8 dBFS. This level is the sweet spot most analog gear is designed for, it assures good headroom throughout the chain. Many folks have claimed that the negative qualities of "digital" sound are actually due to excessively high levels stressing the analog part of the chain. One reason many of us have tried so hard to record "hot" is the difference in level between a commercial mastered CD and our home recordings. This is disconcerting but normal. The solution is to record at -18 dbFS and then raise the level in post production when mixing. Or just turn up the volume knob. It's also _extremely_ important to match levels when making comparisons. Our ears are quite non-linear in frequency response with respect to volume, so a louder playback sounds "bigger" and "richer" and "fuller" and "more alive" and all those other good things. And without years of experience and training (and probably _with_ the experience and training) we cannot mentally compensate for volume differences when we compare things - we really need to make our comparisons at matched levels. As a last note, please allow me to spew on the subject of mic preamps. A perfect mic preamp has no sound of its own, it provides a happy interface for the mic (proper impedance and solid 48v of phantom power), raises the signal level without changing the frequency response or adding noise and distortion. A perfect preamp is impossible, but it's not really that hard to make one that is good enough to fool our ears into thinking it is perfect. Something like an M-Audio DMP3 takes care of business. There are reasons to buy more expensive preamps. Some preamps have a sound (Neve, API) especially when driven into distortion. Some have higher gain, the differences in build quality can be huge which can lead to differences in long term reliability. And if you're doing recording for a living, your gear is part of your image, and having a choice of esoteric preamps is part of your sales strategy. But for us recording at home, preamps should be nearly a non-issue. If we go back to the first paragraph, I suggested that most mics do a decent job of capturing the sound that hits them. This leads to the real secret to improving recordings. Make the sound that hits them better. When I spent a few hundred dollars on compressed fiberglass and burlap, then placed a bunch of broadband absorbers around my recording space, my recordings improved more than any other change I made. And I've spent thousands on a/d converters, preamps, and mics. I have a blog post about building broadband absorbers as well: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...-on-the-cheap/ I see that I've written something of a treatise (or is it a manifesto). I feel a bit like I'm overstepping here, since I'm just an amateur, but I've been on this quest for about 10 years. When I first connected an SM57 to a Behringer mixer then to my Soundblaster card I was blown away with the quality of the recording, but I quickly found myself in the same position you're in now. It was OK, but not good enough, not as good as stuff I heard on CD, not as good as I thought the sound in the room was. So I upgraded every part of the chain, over and over again. I read internet forums and bought the "gear of the week" that was promised to make my recording shine. Each time I was underwhelmed by the difference, until I learned about recording levels and room treatment. Once I had a handle on those two factors, my recordings started sounding decent, and it didn't seem to matter which mic I used or which preamp or soundcard. Fran http://www.homebrewedmusic.com http://www.kaleponi.com |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:18:13 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. First, be sure you need new gear. Have a listen to this recording I made a year or so back. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/listen/duvet.mp3 If anyone has problem with sound, I would go for the room 999 times out of 1000. The mic comes next, and if it isn't actually overloading irrevocably, don't even look at the pre-amp. Behringer make those as well as anybody. d |
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On 11/22/2010 1:18 PM, wrote:
Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) You don't buy a preamp for vocals, though you might buy a mic for vocals. Your problem isn't with the preamp, if you have a problem at all, it's with the mic. This is a mic with which I'm not familiar, nor am I familiar with your voice, so I can't really give you a specific recommendation here. My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard Just to be clear, -10 dBV is the higher sensitivity. You should have plenty of level to drive your sound card. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). The RNP is a nice preamp, but pick out a mic that you like first, and then see if there's still something wrong with your preamp. I'm not a big fan of Behringer by any means, but if you can't get good PERFORMACE (as opposed to the idea sound you're looking for) from it, you're doing something wrong as far as gain setup goes. I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). It's a sensible thing to keep your gear pretty well matched across the board. A $1,000 preamp probably won't make a crummy $100 mic sound much better (there are a couple of exceptions) but a $3-400 mic will probably sound better with your existing preamp and will sound better yet with a better preamp. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. A respectable dealer will let you try a mic at home for a while. You'll probably have to pay for it but you can return it and exchange it for another if you don't care for it. Or buy two or three, keep the one you like best, and return the others for a refund. Over in the US there are dealers who will tell you that you can't return a microphone "due to health regulations" but that's a load of horse manure. Buy from someone who understands that this isn't a guessing game. -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and interesting audio stuff |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On 23/11/2010 6:26 AM, Fran Guidry wrote:
On Nov 22, 10:18 am, wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. Many people are of the opinion that mic choice is critical, a deal breaker. If you want a tidal wave of firm opinions, often based on nothing but reading other people's opinions, try http://www.gearslutz.com or practically any other recording forum. I have this silly idea that most decent mics are _fairly_ similar in their sound quality. To a seasoned pro who has heard hundreds of mics on thousands of sources, the differences are significant, perhaps even critical, but to most of us, if the frequency response is reasonably flat and reasonable extended and both distortion and noise are low, the recording will sound a lot like _the sound waves at the point where the mic was placed_. I have some mic comparisons that I attempted to do fairly carefully, with some attention to level matching and with the same performance for all the mics. Two of the mics are LD, two are SD, they range in price from $150 to $1500+: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...ur-more-clips/ Are the differences in these clips enough to change the artistic impact of the performance? The second part of your question hits at one of the most significant things I learned while trying to figure out audio recording as an amateur. There's a ton of bad advice out there saying levels should be "as high as possible without clipping" or some such. In fact, the switch from analog and dBVU to digital and dBFS resulted in a whole new metering system. Depending on system calibration 0 dBVU is around -18 dBFS, and that is where the RMS levels of your recordings should be aimed. This will give peaks around -8 dBFS. This level is the sweet spot most analog gear is designed for, it assures good headroom throughout the chain. Many folks have claimed that the negative qualities of "digital" sound are actually due to excessively high levels stressing the analog part of the chain. One reason many of us have tried so hard to record "hot" is the difference in level between a commercial mastered CD and our home recordings. This is disconcerting but normal. The solution is to record at -18 dbFS and then raise the level in post production when mixing. Or just turn up the volume knob. It's also _extremely_ important to match levels when making comparisons. Our ears are quite non-linear in frequency response with respect to volume, so a louder playback sounds "bigger" and "richer" and "fuller" and "more alive" and all those other good things. And without years of experience and training (and probably _with_ the experience and training) we cannot mentally compensate for volume differences when we compare things - we really need to make our comparisons at matched levels. As a last note, please allow me to spew on the subject of mic preamps. A perfect mic preamp has no sound of its own, it provides a happy interface for the mic (proper impedance and solid 48v of phantom power), raises the signal level without changing the frequency response or adding noise and distortion. A perfect preamp is impossible, but it's not really that hard to make one that is good enough to fool our ears into thinking it is perfect. Something like an M-Audio DMP3 takes care of business. There are reasons to buy more expensive preamps. Some preamps have a sound (Neve, API) especially when driven into distortion. Some have higher gain, the differences in build quality can be huge which can lead to differences in long term reliability. And if you're doing recording for a living, your gear is part of your image, and having a choice of esoteric preamps is part of your sales strategy. But for us recording at home, preamps should be nearly a non-issue. If we go back to the first paragraph, I suggested that most mics do a decent job of capturing the sound that hits them. This leads to the real secret to improving recordings. Make the sound that hits them better. When I spent a few hundred dollars on compressed fiberglass and burlap, then placed a bunch of broadband absorbers around my recording space, my recordings improved more than any other change I made. And I've spent thousands on a/d converters, preamps, and mics. I have a blog post about building broadband absorbers as well: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...-on-the-cheap/ I see that I've written something of a treatise (or is it a manifesto). I feel a bit like I'm overstepping here, since I'm just an amateur, but I've been on this quest for about 10 years. When I first connected an SM57 to a Behringer mixer then to my Soundblaster card I was blown away with the quality of the recording, but I quickly found myself in the same position you're in now. It was OK, but not good enough, not as good as stuff I heard on CD, not as good as I thought the sound in the room was. So I upgraded every part of the chain, over and over again. I read internet forums and bought the "gear of the week" that was promised to make my recording shine. Each time I was underwhelmed by the difference, until I learned about recording levels and room treatment. Once I had a handle on those two factors, my recordings started sounding decent, and it didn't seem to matter which mic I used or which preamp or soundcard. Fran http://www.homebrewedmusic.com http://www.kaleponi.com Fran, Your experience accords with mine. I'm part of a small team that records classical music concerts for radio broadcast. Our situations range from recording soloists to full symphony orchestras in venues ranging from draughty old churches to the best auditoriums we have in this part of Australia. Between us we use such a range of recorders and pre amps that it is difficult to even comment, except to say that the pre amps rarely if ever enter into serious discussion in terms of final recording quality. Several of the team have Røde NT4s or NT5/55 pairs used in x/y which we use as a main central pair. In my case, I use the NT4 if for instance I want a focussed sound and/or the auditorium has a difficult acoustic. So that the violins don't shriek etc., I routinely apply a software EQ to the tracks at mixing stage which is pretty much an inversion of the published frequency response. When recording in a good acoustic I like to use my Sennheiser MKH40P48/MKH30P48 mid/side pair set up. I normally use no EQ in post processing with these mics. Nobody has yet suggested to me that those recordings have a better sound than my recordings done with the NT4 modified with the software EQ. In fact, I would think it would require an educated pair of ears to be able to tell me that I had use an x/y pair not a m/s pair. My conclusions are; The gap between the greatest and the least in pre amps has and continues to narrow. That possibly applies to microphones but to a lesser extent. Good placement of microphones is of paramount importance to the final result. Sensible level setting gets the most out of your mic and pre amp. Kind regards, Alan |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) what do you mean by flat..off key or lacking in dimension? are you doing any dynamic range compression? Mark |
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
Almost everybody has written a dissertation (or at least a term paper)
answering your question. I'm going to suggest two things: 1. Get a Neumann TLM102 from a place with a good return policy (in other words, they'll take it back if you don't like it). 2. Read some books by F. Alton Everest on what to do about room treatment, then do it. Expect to spend a couple hundred quid to do a thorough job, but a starter job can be done for about a hundred if you're willing to have things look a little amateurish. After that, decide whether you need a new preamp. If so, the Really Nice Preamp is a good 'un. Also take a look at what SafeSound is selling. Since they're in the UK, their stuff may be more affordable than an RNP, and it's really nice-sounding (by which I mean good and neutral, and clean). Peace, Paul |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
Yeah I'm starting to think the mic is probably more of the problem,
its designed to be placed on the grill of a cranked 4x12 and withstand the volume, so for vocals / quite acoustic guitar the signal it must be putting out is fairly low in the grand scheme of things (for vocals full gain on the preamp will just clip, so I knock it back a few notches to get some headroom / comfort in there). Yeah will definitely have to try more mics out then just punting on one. I'm trying to be sensible in my purchases, so I'm after some nice equipment that will last but I do realise I'm not doing this for a living so I'm not going to go out and buy some high end equipment. Thanks for the help! Jon On Nov 23, 2:14*am, Mike Rivers wrote: On 11/22/2010 1:18 PM, wrote: Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) You don't buy a preamp for vocals, though you might buy a mic for vocals. Your problem isn't with the preamp, if you have a problem at all, it's with the mic. This is a mic with which I'm not familiar, nor am I familiar with your voice, so I can't really give you a specific recommendation here. My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard Just to be clear, -10 dBV is the higher sensitivity. You should have plenty of level to drive your sound card. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). The RNP is a nice preamp, but pick out a mic that you like first, and then see if there's still something wrong with your preamp. I'm not a big fan of Behringer by any means, but if you can't get good PERFORMACE (as opposed to the idea sound you're looking for) from it, you're doing something wrong as far as gain setup goes. I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). It's a sensible thing to keep your gear pretty well matched across the board. A $1,000 preamp probably won't make a crummy $100 mic sound much better (there are a couple of exceptions) but a $3-400 mic will probably sound better with your existing preamp and will sound better yet with a better preamp. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. A respectable dealer will let you try a mic at home for a while. You'll probably have to pay for it but you can return it and exchange it for another if you don't care for it. Or buy two or three, keep the one you like best, and return the others for a refund. Over in the US there are dealers who will tell you that you can't return a microphone "due to health regulations" but that's a load of horse manure. Buy from someone who understands that this isn't a guessing game. -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com- useful and interesting audio stuff |
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 22, 7:26 pm, Fran Guidry wrote:
On Nov 22, 10:18 am, " wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. Many people are of the opinion that mic choice is critical, a deal breaker. If you want a tidal wave of firm opinions, often based on nothing but reading other people's opinions, tryhttp://www.gearslutz.com or practically any other recording forum. Haha, yeah I tend to skip this sort of things, people often buy shiney equipment and will happily rave about it. I have this silly idea that most decent mics are _fairly_ similar in their sound quality. To a seasoned pro who has heard hundreds of mics on thousands of sources, the differences are significant, perhaps even critical, but to most of us, if the frequency response is reasonably flat and reasonable extended and both distortion and noise are low, the recording will sound a lot like _the sound waves at the point where the mic was placed_. Yeah I do appreciate this. Its why I'm not entertaining the thought of buying some high end equipment, I could stretch my budget to it, but I wouldn't be able to utilise it. The cheaper the equipment I buy is ultimately the better, it gives me more money to buy a few different mics or I was looking at an isolation stand. I have some mic comparisons that I attempted to do fairly carefully, with some attention to level matching and with the same performance for all the mics. Two of the mics are LD, two are SD, they range in price from $150 to $1500+:http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...n-four-more-cl... Are the differences in these clips enough to change the artistic impact of the performance? That was an interesting blog entry, will probably have another listen tonight and write a comment on there :P But yeah, there were differences between them but all minor. I think what struck me most is I think what don pierce is talking about, those recordings all have a very clean cut nature about them which I cant get and sounds like its more to do with the room. The second part of your question hits at one of the most significant things I learned while trying to figure out audio recording as an amateur. There's a ton of bad advice out there saying levels should be "as high as possible without clipping" or some such. In fact, the switch from analog and dBVU to digital and dBFS resulted in a whole new metering system. Depending on system calibration 0 dBVU is around -18 dBFS, and that is where the RMS levels of your recordings should be aimed. This will give peaks around -8 dBFS. This level is the sweet spot most analog gear is designed for, it assures good headroom throughout the chain. Many folks have claimed that the negative qualities of "digital" sound are actually due to excessively high levels stressing the analog part of the chain. Might take me a while to fully get this, will ponder. The main reason I want to drive them more is because it gives me more headroom to play with. I.e. I'm not trying push it, but if I play loud / soft I like the soft part to be recorded at a decent level / not get close to any base noise. It seems odd to me to have 1/4 of the usable range just not utilised (even if I shout / smash the guitar it clips the preamp and only lights up part of the way up the soundcard). The only part of my incomming chain where I can clip is my preamp. One reason many of us have tried so hard to record "hot" is the difference in level between a commercial mastered CD and our home recordings. This is disconcerting but normal. The solution is to record at -18 dbFS and then raise the level in post production when mixing. Or just turn up the volume knob. It's also _extremely_ important to match levels when making comparisons. Our ears are quite non-linear in frequency response with respect to volume, so a louder playback sounds "bigger" and "richer" and "fuller" and "more alive" and all those other good things. And without years of experience and training (and probably _with_ the experience and training) we cannot mentally compensate for volume differences when we compare things - we really need to make our comparisons at matched levels. As a last note, please allow me to spew on the subject of mic preamps. A perfect mic preamp has no sound of its own, it provides a happy interface for the mic (proper impedance and solid 48v of phantom power), raises the signal level without changing the frequency response or adding noise and distortion. A perfect preamp is impossible, but it's not really that hard to make one that is good enough to fool our ears into thinking it is perfect. Something like an M-Audio DMP3 takes care of business. There are reasons to buy more expensive preamps. Some preamps have a sound (Neve, API) especially when driven into distortion. Some have higher gain, the differences in build quality can be huge which can lead to differences in long term reliability. And if you're doing recording for a living, your gear is part of your image, and having a choice of esoteric preamps is part of your sales strategy. But for us recording at home, preamps should be nearly a non-issue. That all makes a lot of sense thanks. If we go back to the first paragraph, I suggested that most mics do a decent job of capturing the sound that hits them. This leads to the real secret to improving recordings. Make the sound that hits them better. When I spent a few hundred dollars on compressed fiberglass and burlap, then placed a bunch of broadband absorbers around my recording space, my recordings improved more than any other change I made. And I've spent thousands on a/d converters, preamps, and mics. I have a blog post about building broadband absorbers as well:http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...oadband-absorb... Yeah think this is a problem. Hopefully in a position to buy a house next year and one room is definitely going to turn into a proper studio room :P I see that I've written something of a treatise (or is it a manifesto). I feel a bit like I'm overstepping here, since I'm just an amateur, but I've been on this quest for about 10 years. When I first connected an SM57 to a Behringer mixer then to my Soundblaster card I was blown away with the quality of the recording, but I quickly found myself in the same position you're in now. It was OK, but not good enough, not as good as stuff I heard on CD, not as good as I thought the sound in the room was. Yeah the same thing has happened to me over the years. So I upgraded every part of the chain, over and over again. I read internet forums and bought the "gear of the week" that was promised to make my recording shine. Each time I was underwhelmed by the difference, until I learned about recording levels and room treatment. Once I had a handle on those two factors, my recordings started sounding decent, and it didn't seem to matter which mic I used or which preamp or soundcard. lol yep, can quite easily see myself doing this, its why I'm trying to guage what to buy, and trying to make this a one off purchase, i.e. get something good enough it will more than enough meet my needs forever and if I win the lottery, then great :P Franhttp://www.homebrewedmusic.comhttp://www.kaleponi.com Thanks again for the help! Jon |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 22, 7:37*pm, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:18:13 -0800 (PST), " wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. *So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). *Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). *Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). *I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. *If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. First, be sure you need new gear. Have a listen to this recording I made a year or so back. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/listen/duvet.mp3 If anyone has problem with sound, I would go for the room 999 times out of 1000. The mic comes next, and if it isn't actually overloading irrevocably, don't even look at the pre-amp. Behringer make those as well as anybody. d Interesting clip thanks, yeah I think this a bit of a problem but no where severe. When I got home last night I quite recorded a small loop to show you what I'm hearing. It can be found over he http://soundcloud.com/jon-mithe/sets/acoustic-test It was too late to sing and I'm atm far to reserved for that (been singing like 1/2 a year :P). On the clips, the first one is a clean version, this is just the raw take. Second one is one where I just threw some effects on, bit crazy on the phase but its sortof shifted the way I wanted, i.e. bit more sparlky / depth. In the clean one though to me there sounds like a cone of mud around it. Its what I get on every recording and every recording I have to quite aggressivly mess around with the EQ to get something I regard as approaching clean. For the effects on I primarily cut some of the upper mids and added a little more treble to try and reduce that. Little bit of reverb (just cakewalks default) and some phase to make it more stereo sounding and ever so slightest bit of compression. My room for recording isnt perfect, I rent in a shared house but should hopefully be buying my first house next year, so then I will have a dedicated room that I will do some proper treatment on. As for the room, its fairly large, with a double bed in the center and a good meter 2 meters of free space around it. I record with my back facing the curtains (its a fairly large double bay window, so there are alot of curtaians). This was not on purpose, just the best use of the space, but I imagine the curtains are doing something similar to your duvet clip. Only thing is my walls are fairly blankso I'm guessing there could be some bounce off of them Thanks for your help! Jon |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
"Alan" wrote in message
On 23/11/2010 6:26 AM, Fran Guidry wrote: On Nov 22, 10:18 am, wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. £600, same with the mic preamp really). I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. I have this silly idea that most decent mics are _fairly_ similar in their sound quality. To a seasoned pro who has heard hundreds of mics on thousands of sources, the differences are significant, perhaps even critical, but to most of us, if the frequency response is reasonably flat and reasonable extended and both distortion and noise are low, the recording will sound a lot like _the sound waves at the point where the mic was placed_. One reason many of us have tried so hard to record "hot" is the difference in level between a commercial mastered CD and our home recordings. This is disconcerting but normal. The solution is to record at -18 dbFS and then raise the level in post production when mixing. Or just turn up the volume knob. If we go back to the first paragraph, I suggested that most mics do a decent job of capturing the sound that hits them. This leads to the real secret to improving recordings. Make the sound that hits them better. When I spent a few hundred dollars on compressed fiberglass and burlap, then placed a bunch of broadband absorbers around my recording space, my recordings improved more than any other change I made. And I've spent thousands on a/d converters, preamps, and mics. I have a blog post about building broadband absorbers as well: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...-on-the-cheap/ When I first connected an SM57 to a Behringer mixer then to my Soundblaster card I was blown away with the quality of the recording, but I quickly found myself in the same position you're in now. It was OK, but not good enough, not as good as stuff I heard on CD, not as good as I thought the sound in the room was. So I upgraded every part of the chain, over and over again. I read internet forums and bought the "gear of the week" that was promised to make my recording shine. Each time I was underwhelmed by the difference, until I learned about recording levels and room treatment. Once I had a handle on those two factors, my recordings started sounding decent, and it didn't seem to matter which mic I used or which preamp or soundcard. Your experience accords with mine. I'm part of a small team that records classical music concerts for radio broadcast. Our situations range from recording soloists to full symphony orchestras in venues ranging from draughty old churches to the best auditoriums we have in this part of Australia. Between us we use such a range of recorders and pre amps that it is difficult to even comment, except to say that the pre amps rarely if ever enter into serious discussion in terms of final recording quality. My conclusions are; The gap between the greatest and the least in pre amps has and continues to narrow. That possibly applies to microphones but to a lesser extent. Good placement of microphones is of paramount importance to the final result. Sensible level setting gets the most out of your mic and pre amp. To me, this is the *money thread* in this group of posts. These days good sounding recordings can be all about mic placement and the venue, once microphone and recorder quality reaches fairly levels that are fairly minimal by modern standards. If your recordings don't sound good to you, spend the big bucks on the acoustics at your recording site, and learn how to mic, unless the local acoustics and your technique is already beyond reproach. IME the audible quality differences between good mics and good mic preamps isn't so much any more. The differences due to mic placement and venues can easily be huge. I just finished a video gig that was recorded with 3 mics. One of the neat things about digital recording in 2010, whether audio or video is that wild recording (captured with totally independent recorders) is entirely feasible. The 3 mics we one on a cheap DV camcorder, one on a mid-priced flash-based digital point-and-shoot that did HD video, and the-in-the-box electret omni mics that come with the Microtrack sitting on a lamp table next to the person being interviewed. In the end, it was easy to set up a level-matched, time synched comparison during video editing. The mics in the two cameras, whether due to their basic natures or where they were located provided recordigns that were clearly substandard, but the sound from the Microtrack was clear and natural. We chose the recording location to minimize background noise and reflections and were rewarded with a video that worked well, even when played in a excessively reverbrerant church sanctuary. Once our mic and recorder quality reached a fairly minimal level, it was all about how we used our tools, not what they were. Beware of mics on cameras. BTW, the video from the cheap DV camera was far cleaner and crisper than that from the digital point-and-shoot, megapixels and alleged HD format notwithstanding. |
|
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 05:14:48 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: On Nov 22, 7:37*pm, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:18:13 -0800 (PST), " wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. *So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). *Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). *Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). *I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. *If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. First, be sure you need new gear. Have a listen to this recording I made a year or so back. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/listen/duvet.mp3 If anyone has problem with sound, I would go for the room 999 times out of 1000. The mic comes next, and if it isn't actually overloading irrevocably, don't even look at the pre-amp. Behringer make those as well as anybody. d Interesting clip thanks, yeah I think this a bit of a problem but no where severe. When I got home last night I quite recorded a small loop to show you what I'm hearing. It can be found over he http://soundcloud.com/jon-mithe/sets/acoustic-test It was too late to sing and I'm atm far to reserved for that (been singing like 1/2 a year :P). On the clips, the first one is a clean version, this is just the raw take. Second one is one where I just threw some effects on, bit crazy on the phase but its sortof shifted the way I wanted, i.e. bit more sparlky / depth. In the clean one though to me there sounds like a cone of mud around it. Its what I get on every recording and every recording I have to quite aggressivly mess around with the EQ to get something I regard as approaching clean. For the effects on I primarily cut some of the upper mids and added a little more treble to try and reduce that. Little bit of reverb (just cakewalks default) and some phase to make it more stereo sounding and ever so slightest bit of compression. My room for recording isnt perfect, I rent in a shared house but should hopefully be buying my first house next year, so then I will have a dedicated room that I will do some proper treatment on. As for the room, its fairly large, with a double bed in the center and a good meter 2 meters of free space around it. I record with my back facing the curtains (its a fairly large double bay window, so there are alot of curtaians). This was not on purpose, just the best use of the space, but I imagine the curtains are doing something similar to your duvet clip. Only thing is my walls are fairly blankso I'm guessing there could be some bounce off of them Thanks for your help! Jon You need to be wary of curtains - they do things to the top end, but absolutely nothing to the muddy bottom end you get in the average room. You need some thickness to take care of that. Proper traps are best, but eight inches of Siberian goose down comes a pretty close second. Your guitar won't show up too much of that, but anything a bit bassier - even a male voice - certainly will. The effects clip sounds good, but I think I would back off the reverb by a good half. d |
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 23, 7:41*am, PStamler wrote:
Almost everybody has written a dissertation (or at least a term paper) answering your question. I'm going to suggest two things: 1. Get a Neumann TLM102 from a place with a good return policy (in other words, they'll take it back if you don't like it). 2. Read some books by F. Alton Everest on what to do about room treatment, then do it. Expect to spend a couple hundred quid to do a thorough job, *but a starter job can be done for about a hundred if you're willing to have things look a little amateurish. After that, decide whether you need a new preamp. If so, the Really Nice Preamp is a good 'un. Also take a look at what SafeSound is selling. Since they're in the UK, their stuff may be more affordable than an RNP, and it's really nice-sounding (by which I mean good and neutral, and clean). Peace, Paul Will check those out thanks, missed that neumann mic on my search, every one I saw was 1000's of pounds. Thanks, Jon |
|
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 23, 4:02*am, Mark wrote:
My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) what do you mean by flat..off key or lacking in dimension? are you doing any dynamic range compression? Mark Hi, I recorded a looped clip last night: http://soundcloud.com/jon-mithe/sets/acoustic-test clean one being the raw take and the effects on being one with far too much phase on it... but I think its in a better direction, or at least I thought... Thanks, Jon |
|
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 22, 9:37*pm, Ty Ford wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 13:18:13 -0500, wrote (in article ): Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) Jon, there are so many places to start I don't know where to begin. The acoustics of our space have much to do with how present your voice (or anything else) sounds when recorded. To deal with that you need a space with some absorption and some diffusion. My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). maybe. maybe not. Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). Well sound card can suck mightily I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. *So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). *Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). *Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P This --http://www.pssl.com/MXL-SP1-Condenser-Studio-Microphone-With-Clip-- is an excellent starter mic; worth more than it costs - more that $200 -$300. Yes, the RNP is a good choice. Getting it into your computer seems like the biggest problem. I'm sure others will have opinions on that. Regards, Ty Ford I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). *I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. *If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demoshttp://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA I dont think the soundcard is the problem, as I when I upgraded to that soundcard from my old m-audiophile I thought I was getting better sounds. Could be a complete figment of my imagination but probably is because inbetween those cards I moved house and became better generally at this sort of stuff / guitar (it was a good half a year). I will check that mic out thanks, Jon I have a feeling my room is screwing up / confusing the sound somewhat. I also get the feeling my mic certain for vocal / acoustic is not well suited and a cheap condenser mic would probably out perform it on vocals / acoustic. Surely there must be a large difference between a $50 mic and a $400 mic no? |
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 23, 1:20*pm, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 05:14:48 -0800 (PST), " wrote: On Nov 22, 7:37*pm, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:18:13 -0800 (PST), " wrote: Hi, Sorry the shamless punt for advice regarding purchases, but I'm a little confused. Looking for a decent mic for vocal (and possible acoustic guitar) and also a mic pre amp. Currently I have a Sennheiser e906, a generic Behringer mic preamp and an echo layla 3G. *I use this primarily for guitars, but have recently started *recording singing and percussion (bongos, djembe). My gripe with the e906 for vocals is it sounds quite flat + pushed back. *It works well enough for distorted + semi distorted guitar, but for clean and acoustic i'm not so happy. (may well be more about my recording setup / placement) My main problem with the preamp is I think it struggles to push my soundcard properly. *The echo's inputs are -10/+4dB and I have to set the more sensitive of the two. *I think this lowers the headroom / range and is making the noise level more significant (s/n ratio). Even when I drive the preamp to the point of distortion, it struggles to come close to clipping the soundcard (i.e. to get close to getting a normal level I have to really drive the preamp hard, which seems to add more noise). I've got ~£1000 I saved up for some new musical equipment. *So was pretty much thinking about punting it towards this. Was thinking of a Really Nice Preamp (~£500) and then spending either the rest on a mic (2 channels is all I need). *Recording vocals is my priority for the mic (if I need to record an acoustic guitar or bongos, I can always save up over time for another mic). From what I read I ideally need a large diaphragm condenser microphone, only ones I see are the Shure SM27, or maybe something like the RODE NT2000, K2, NTK (never heard of this brand, but I see them mentioned on this group a bit). *Sennheiser MKH seem maybe a little excessive for me, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise about this or this price range :P I dont know whether its worth spending £200-£300 on a mic or whether I should put out a bit more on one (e.g. *£600, same with the mic preamp really). *I'm open to doing that, I dont mind if it maybe a little excessive for my uses (I like headroom), better that then in a year or two get annoyed and end up spending that money anyway. Not sure where I can test this mics, will try to. *If I were to describe the tonal qualities of my voice, I'm not that nasal, more mellow. Would appreciate any help figuring this out, thanks, Jon. First, be sure you need new gear. Have a listen to this recording I made a year or so back. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/listen/duvet.mp3 If anyone has problem with sound, I would go for the room 999 times out of 1000. The mic comes next, and if it isn't actually overloading irrevocably, don't even look at the pre-amp. Behringer make those as well as anybody. d Interesting clip thanks, yeah I think this a bit of a problem but no where severe. *When I got home last night I quite recorded a small loop to show you what I'm hearing. *It can be found over he http://soundcloud.com/jon-mithe/sets/acoustic-test It was too late to sing and I'm atm far to reserved for that (been singing like 1/2 a year :P). *On the clips, the first one is a clean version, this is just the raw take. *Second one is one where I just threw some effects on, bit crazy on the phase but its sortof shifted the way I wanted, i.e. bit more sparlky / depth. In the clean one though to me there sounds like a cone of mud around it. *Its what I get on every recording and every recording I have to quite aggressivly mess around with the EQ to get something I regard as approaching clean. *For the effects on I primarily cut some of the upper mids and added a little more treble to try and reduce that. Little bit of reverb (just cakewalks default) and some phase to make it more stereo sounding and ever so slightest bit of compression. My room for recording isnt perfect, I rent in a shared house but should hopefully be buying my first house next year, so then I will have a dedicated room that I will do some proper treatment on. *As for the room, its fairly large, with a double bed in the center and a good meter 2 meters of free space around it. *I record with my back facing the curtains (its a fairly large double bay window, so there are alot of curtaians). *This was not on purpose, just the best use of the space, but I imagine the curtains are doing something similar to your duvet clip. *Only thing is my walls are fairly blankso I'm guessing there could be some bounce off of them Thanks for your help! Jon You need to be wary of curtains - they do things to the top end, but absolutely nothing to the muddy bottom end you get in the average room. You need some thickness to take care of that. Proper traps are best, but eight inches of Siberian goose down comes a pretty close second. Your guitar won't show up too much of that, but anything a bit bassier - even a male voice - certainly will. The effects clip sounds good, but I think I would back off the reverb by a good half. d ha, yes definitely. In the process of looking for a house, think I may start reading into what makes a good studio space and what sort of 2nd room requirements I need :P Hopefully I can create a music / studio room that has some basic acousticness to it. Thanks again, Jon |
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
PStamler wrote:
Almost everybody has written a dissertation (or at least a term paper) answering your question. I'm going to suggest two things: 1. Get a Neumann TLM102 from a place with a good return policy (in other words, they'll take it back if you don't like it). 2. Read some books by F. Alton Everest on what to do about room treatment, then do it. Expect to spend a couple hundred quid to do a thorough job, but a starter job can be done for about a hundred if you're willing to have things look a little amateurish. After that, decide whether you need a new preamp. If so, the Really Nice Preamp is a good 'un. Also take a look at what SafeSound is selling. Since they're in the UK, their stuff may be more affordable than an RNP, and it's really nice-sounding (by which I mean good and neutral, and clean). Peace, Paul What he said. -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShai...withDougHarman |
|
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Nov 23, 7:23*am, "
wrote: On Nov 23, 7:41*am, PStamler wrote: Almost everybody has written a dissertation (or at least a term paper) answering your question. I'm going to suggest two things: 1. Get a Neumann TLM102 from a place with a good return policy (in other words, they'll take it back if you don't like it). 2. Read some books by F. Alton Everest on what to do about room treatment, then do it. Expect to spend a couple hundred quid to do a thorough job, *but a starter job can be done for about a hundred if you're willing to have things look a little amateurish. After that, decide whether you need a new preamp. If so, the Really Nice Preamp is a good 'un. Also take a look at what SafeSound is selling. Since they're in the UK, their stuff may be more affordable than an RNP, and it's really nice-sounding (by which I mean good and neutral, and clean). Peace, Paul Will check those out thanks, missed that neumann mic on my search, every one I saw was 1000's of pounds. The TLM 102 is new, and it's a game-changer. It sells for about US$800 here (don't know how much in the UK or EU), and it sounds so damn good that anybody else selling a mic in that price range is in real big trouble. One nice thing about it: the off-axis response is flatter than that of most large-diaphragm mics, so it doesn't add its own weirdness to the room sound and leakage. Peace, Paul |
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 12:35:54 -0500, PStamler wrote
(in article ): On Nov 23, 7:23*am, " wrote: On Nov 23, 7:41*am, PStamler wrote: Almost everybody has written a dissertation (or at least a term paper) answering your question. I'm going to suggest two things: 1. Get a Neumann TLM102 from a place with a good return policy (in other words, they'll take it back if you don't like it). 2. Read some books by F. Alton Everest on what to do about room treatment, then do it. Expect to spend a couple hundred quid to do a thorough job, *but a starter job can be done for about a hundred if you're willing to have things look a little amateurish. After that, decide whether you need a new preamp. If so, the Really Nice Preamp is a good 'un. Also take a look at what SafeSound is selling. Since they're in the UK, their stuff may be more affordable than an RNP, and it's really nice-sounding (by which I mean good and neutral, and clean). Peace, Paul Will check those out thanks, missed that neumann mic on my search, every one I saw was 1000's of pounds. The TLM 102 is new, and it's a game-changer. It sells for about US$800 here (don't know how much in the UK or EU), and it sounds so damn good that anybody else selling a mic in that price range is in real big trouble. One nice thing about it: the off-axis response is flatter than that of most large-diaphragm mics, so it doesn't add its own weirdness to the room sound and leakage. Peace, Paul Paul, I agree. It sounds nothing like a TLM 103 (which certainly has it's own uses). http://www.vimeo.com/2179144 I have a couple of 103s and wouldn't mind having a couple of 102s. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mic + mic preamp advice
Hi, I recorded a looped clip last night: http://soundcloud.com/jon-mithe/sets/acoustic-test clean one being the raw take and the effects on being one with far too much phase on it... *but I think its in a better direction, or at least I thought... Thanks, Jon both sound boxy to me.... try some EQ ... 5 to 10 dB (or less) cut at 220 Hz. or move the mic away from the sound hole.. Mark |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| need preamp advice, plz | Audio Opinions | |||
| Rode NTK - Preamp Advice | Pro Audio | |||
| mic and preamp advice on 2 grand | Pro Audio | |||
| advice on mic preamp usage | Pro Audio | |||
| preamp advice | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
