Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > Recording Technologies and Techniques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-13-2021, 09:18 AM   #81
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

That study was interesting.

However it should not be used to infer .......
I'll stop there and read the other posts that I missed whist reading the report. But I guess we may have similar concerns!
Such as limited sources, particular room, unrealistic as no practical corrections used .....etc.
.
.
.
.
EDIT: Well I agree with Stu.

But I would add that anyone using that study to come to wide ranging inferences ought to be fully aware of
the description of what was done, the limitations mentioned,
the reported likely (edit) sources of error,
the scientifically small sample and therefore probably unrepresentative "measurements" such as only three mic brands,
the conclusion that one pattern is easier to position (easier does not (edit) equate necessarily to better),
variation in loudness during listening tests,
several unknowns such as listening conditions,
the assumed competence of the listeners,
and the very limited programmme material,

need I go on? Ah yes the lack of normal adjustment (other than gain/loudness made) to adjust for know characteristics.


Then as Stu writes to use such a limited study to infer it is applicable to other situations.

(Second edit to correct meanings after re-reading shown with the edit followed by "(edit)". !! Hmmm hope that makes sense...

Last edited by Allybye; 02-13-2021 at 01:05 PM.
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2021, 12:46 PM   #82
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
Back in college we spent a couple of solid months just testing microphones, measuring responses, comparing polar patterns, what happens to off and on axis sounds, which situations work well for specific types, how to leverage rejection and so on. I even still have the 4 inch thick ring binder full of spec sheets, detailed measurements etc 20 years later, it has been useful to look back on from time to time.

I don’t deny the advantages omni mics have, and understand them quite well. This thread is going round in circles now, because again I’m going to have to say - there are valid reasons that cardioid (or other) patterns are often the better choice over omni, especially when rejection (such as required - by the OP of this thread, who mentions issues with acoustics, fan noise and other people in his living situation) will be more important than any of the advantages offered by an omni pattern mic.

At no point have I said that Omni pattern mics are inferior to cardioid. Likewise, cardioid is not inferior to omni - it all depends on what is required and useful in a given situation.

Your example of the MD21: hypothetically, if we could position this mic at a specific distance to a source and at the same time position a cardioid pattern mic of the same sensitivity in the same place, and adjust the preamp gain so that both are recording the source at the same level. The Omni will pick up more indirect sound than the cardioid. Any time that you find an Omni is picking up less indirect sound than an equivalent cardioid can only be due to lower sensitivity or different positioning. If you are saying that an Omni mic with no rejection can somehow reject indirect sound more effectively than a polar pattern that does have rejection, please can you explain how this is possible and provide some kind of literature to back it up? I would honestly be very interested to read it and further my understanding.
You're right Stu. That example with the MD21 and the NT1 was just something I should've explained better. I tried to explain that it's not just cardio or omni that decides how much room sound is picked up. You almost sensed what I worded badly. Of course sensitivity and frequency curve matter a lot.

What I love about omnis is that -in general- they provide a more natural sound if you can take the disadvantages. Maybe that's not relevant in this thread, as the OP is dealing with fan noise etc. I tend to forget the starting point of the thread when it gets longer...
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 07:26 PM   #83
Time Waster
Human being with feelings
 
Time Waster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bowral, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Default

The video linked below is about how to get good results from a budget (dynamic) mic. It also does a good job of showing the differences between condenser and dynamic mics, demonstrates the importance of the fx processing and suggests that the type of mic you use may be influenced by the style of music it is used for:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB0Fvig32lQ
__________________
Mal, aka The Wasters of Time
Mal's JSFX: ReaRack2 Modular Synth
Time Waster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 09:28 PM   #84
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Waster View Post
The video linked below is about how to get good results from a budget (dynamic) mic. It also does a good job of showing the differences between condenser and dynamic mics, demonstrates the importance of the fx processing and suggests that the type of mic you use may be influenced by the style of music it is used for:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB0Fvig32lQ
Yes. That video was also posted in a related thread at the REAPER forum about processing vocals. link: https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....18#post2402018

And I noticed that he's using an SM57, with not even a windscreen, and he's still getting good results. Better to have used an SM58 because it has somewhat of a pop filter.

In the comments someone mentions the importance of a good mic preamp. Liepe replies, " I was using stock ensemble pres for everything... good pres, but nothing special " Don't know what he's talking about, but if he means the Apogee Ensemble, that's a very expensive piece of gear.

Last edited by Peterk312; 02-16-2021 at 09:37 PM.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2021, 12:51 AM   #85
took-the-red-pill
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 36
Default

Sure you can record vocals with an SM58. Just like you can pound a nail into a 2 x 4 with a ball peen hammer. Or you can use a plumber’s pipe wrench to remove your lug nuts.

It’s possible, just a terrible choice, possibly the worst one there is.

It’s also possible to get a great performance from a 58, but you have to be a great engineer to do it, especially with a male vocal.

There are about a hundred better choices.
took-the-red-pill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2021, 06:47 PM   #86
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by took-the-red-pill View Post
Sure you can record vocals with an SM58. Just like you can pound a nail into a 2 x 4 with a ball peen hammer. Or you can use a plumber’s pipe wrench to remove your lug nuts.

It’s possible, just a terrible choice, possibly the worst one there is.

It’s also possible to get a great performance from a 58, but you have to be a great engineer to do it, especially with a male vocal.

There are about a hundred better choices.
Given most of the responses on this topic, examples of respected artists who have used SM58 mics both live and for recordings, and the examples of videos on YouTube that demonstrate how the SM58 mic itself is not making a world of difference compared to a large diaphragm condenser mic, and given the importance of both mic preamp and post-processing for a vocal track, I find your analogy about ball peen hammers and pipe wrenches to be way off. Although it has many uses, the SM58 is voiced for use as a vocal microphone.

And you say there are HUNDREDS of better mic options for vocals than an SM58. Can you name three that are in the same price range that are automatically going to do a better job of tracking vocals?

I'll even give you a start. How about the SM86? It's similar in sound to the SM58, but it's a condenser mic, costs about $180 compared to the SM58 costing $99, but it sounds too bright to my ears, much like the Beta 58a ($160). Although it sounds a bit more clear and bright compared to the SM58, both mics do not have a flat frequency response at the top, giving it good presence but in my case the SM86 and the Beta 58a may make my voice sound too thin. Do I want to cut the high frequencies (SM86)or add a high pass to tame the low frequencies (SM58)? Probably doesn't matter which way I do it, but if you record with either of these, you have to do it. The question becomes how much do you cut?

ANY mic will automatically sound better for vocals compared to an SM58? Rubbish!

Last edited by Peterk312; 02-17-2021 at 10:46 PM.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 08:52 AM   #87
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by took-the-red-pill View Post
Sure you can record vocals with an SM58. Just like you can pound a nail into a 2 x 4 with a ball peen hammer.
Or you could use an SM58 to pound the nail...
__________________
Ici on parles Franglais
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 08:55 AM   #88
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk312 View Post
Given most of the responses on this topic, examples of respected artists who have used SM58 mics both live and for recordings, and the examples of videos on YouTube that demonstrate how the SM58 mic itself is not making a world of difference compared to a large diaphragm condenser mic, and given the importance of both mic preamp and post-processing for a vocal track, I find your analogy about ball peen hammers and pipe wrenches to be way off. Although it has many uses, the SM58 is voiced for use as a vocal microphone.

And you say there are HUNDREDS of better mic options for vocals than an SM58. Can you name three that are in the same price range that are automatically going to do a better job of tracking vocals?

I'll even give you a start. How about the SM86? It's similar in sound to the SM58, but it's a condenser mic, costs about $180 compared to the SM58 costing $99, but it sounds too bright to my ears, much like the Beta 58a ($160). Although it sounds a bit more clear and bright compared to the SM58, both mics do not have a flat frequency response at the top, giving it good presence but in my case the SM86 and the Beta 58a may make my voice sound too thin. Do I want to cut the high frequencies (SM86)or add a high pass to tame the low frequencies (SM58)? Probably doesn't matter which way I do it, but if you record with either of these, you have to do it. The question becomes how much do you cut?

ANY mic will automatically sound better for vocals compared to an SM58? Rubbish!

Ahem! I switched to Sennheiser dynamics all of which cost about the same or slightly less than Shure SM 57 or 58. I still use my one SM57 for mic`ing guitar amps, but the SM58s sit in a mic box doing nothing these days. Same goes for several of the AKG equivalents and of course for a little more money a BeyerDynamic. I use a Beyer for my own vocals live & love it, apart from the extended bottom end, which means I don`t have to tweak the bass eq singing live...
__________________
Ici on parles Franglais
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 09:05 AM   #89
Stu
Human being with feelings
 
Stu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
Ahem! I switched to Sennheiser dynamics all of which cost about the same or slightly less than Shure SM 57 or 58. I still use my one SM57 for mic`ing guitar amps, but the SM58s sit in a mic box doing nothing these days. Same goes for several of the AKG equivalents and of course for a little more money a BeyerDynamic. I use a Beyer for my own vocals live & love it, apart from the extended bottom end, which means I don`t have to tweak the bass eq singing live...
I think Peter is trying to point out that different mics work well with different singers and in different contexts. Sometimes a 58 is absolutely perfect, so it’s not really possible to say ‘x/y/z mic is better than a 58’ when we don’t know the context. A 58 isn’t my favourite vocal mic certainly, but sometimes it’s the best mic for the job and isn’t intrinsically ‘bad’ in any way. Or put another way - if you can’t get a decent vocal recording with a 58, then there are probably many more problems to solve before looking for a different mic.
Stu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 06:43 PM   #90
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Listen to the SM58 vocal on this version of a mix I did today:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....94#post2407994

Post-processing makes a world of difference.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 06:47 PM   #91
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
Ahem! I switched to Sennheiser dynamics all of which cost about the same or slightly less than Shure SM 57 or 58. I still use my one SM57 for mic`ing guitar amps, but the SM58s sit in a mic box doing nothing these days. Same goes for several of the AKG equivalents and of course for a little more money a BeyerDynamic. I use a Beyer for my own vocals live & love it, apart from the extended bottom end, which means I don`t have to tweak the bass eq singing live...
But you're not saying WHY the Sennheiser, AKG, or BeyerDynamic "equivalents" of an SM58 (whatever that means) will automatically sound better than a Shure SM58 if used to record vocals. You're just mentioning other microphones.

Why are THOSE microphones going to automatically yield much better results than an SM58?

.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 02:11 AM   #92
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

A standard isn't necessarily the best of class.

The clearest example is that Roland? active mini monitor with a metal case. It's a standard mono monitor in broadcast. It's certainly not the best you can get. In fact, it's rather expensive for what it is. But people buy it, so the manufacturer still makes it, after 25 years.

It's a standard because people know it.

The same with a 57/58. It's a decent mic. At a decent price. Not a miracle. I can understand people using it in live. For studio recordings, however, you might want to experiment as suppression of handling noise and being indestructible don't matter.
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 02:35 AM   #93
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk312 View Post
But you're not saying WHY the Sennheiser, AKG, or BeyerDynamic "equivalents" of an SM58 (whatever that means) will automatically sound better than a Shure SM58 if used to record vocals. You're just mentioning other microphones.

Why are THOSE microphones going to automatically yield much better results than an SM58?

.
I did as you say JUST mention other microphones & my own personal decisions, based on cost, general performance & what works best to my ears.
I know a load of people whose live sound with SM58s is great. I also know just as many that sound like crap through them but because audiences & engineers have gotten used to that hyped top end sound from SM 58s nobody seems to notice.

All of this discussion really comes down to opinions when you look at it objectively & my opinion is that to my ears (and others) for live work the better end of the Sennheiser dynamic mics tends to make singers sound better than yer average 58.
__________________
Ici on parles Franglais
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 11:00 AM   #94
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
I did as you say JUST mention other microphones & my own personal decisions, based on cost, general performance & what works best to my ears.
I know a load of people whose live sound with SM58s is great. I also know just as many that sound like crap through them but because audiences & engineers have gotten used to that hyped top end sound from SM 58s nobody seems to notice.
Just reminding you this thread is about recording, not live sound. You are taking this topic in a different direction.

And you do not address the question I initially posed, which is the notion that a large diaphragm mic will automatically sound better in a recording for vocals compared to an SM58. What prompted me to ask for the name of three mics that will somehow automatically provide better results than an SM58 FOR RECORDING was in response to the post above by took-the-red-pill who clearly states:
Quote:
Originally Posted by took-the-red-pill View Post
Sure you can record vocals with an SM58...

It’s possible, just a terrible choice, possibly the worst one there is...

There are about a hundred better choices.
Of course you are entitled to your opinions, but please don't change the topic. The post referenced above is about much more than a personal opinion when it comes to how poor a choice of mic it is to use an SM58 to record a vocal. This person is stating it as if fact.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 11:05 AM   #95
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
A standard isn't necessarily the best of class.
Are we really going to start making arguments in the absurd about "best of class" and compare a $3200 Neumann U87 and a $99 SM58 ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
...my opinion is that to my ears (and others) for live work the better end of the Sennheiser dynamic mics tends to make singers sound better than yer average 58.
Again, not addressing microphone when used for live performance.

But you are suggesting the mic itself will automatically make a singer sound better, which I find overgeneralized and unrealistic.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 11:16 AM   #96
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
...if you can’t get a decent vocal recording with a 58, then there are probably many more problems to solve before looking for a different mic.
I just wanted to emphasize this point now that the topic is going off course. I think you make a good point here. And if I can go back to my original topic, there is the notion that a microphone, particularly a large diaphragm condenser, must be used for vocals or the vocal recording will ultimately suck. Even if the vocal performance is great, it will never have the quality that a large diaphragm condenser would have provided. I am not addressing the obvious here that if you used a high quality very expensive LDC to record a vocal there wouldn't be more potential to capture a better recording than if you used an SM58.

Throughout the length of this thread the argument has been made in favor of how you can get good, acceptable recording results using an SM58. Along comes someone who basically says, WHAT?! An SM58 is probably the WORST mic you could possibly use for vocals!

Meanwhile the "SM" in SM58 stands for "Studio Microphone." It was designed (and marketed) for voice production.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 12:21 PM   #97
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 9,409
Default

I've only ever used an SM57 for vocals on every track I've posted hereabouts. So if there's any of that at all sounding good enough then an SM57 is good enough, imo.

iow if the processing on the vocal track is done within the range of what is 'proper' then I doubt a more expensive mic is gonna add anything. This reminds me of the story where Ted Nugent visited Eddie Van Halen and asked to play some guitar through his amp setup, which he did.

Later on an interviewer asked Eddie how Ted sounded through his rig and Eddie replied "he sounded like Ted"
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 01:01 PM   #98
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk312 View Post
Are we really going to start making arguments in the absurd about "best of class" and compare a $3200 Neumann U87 and a $99 SM58 ?
I didn't suggest that and you presume a $3200 Neumann U87 is necessarily better than any other mic. I've got news for you: it isn't. Not even for vocals. For one thing, no two vintage U87s sound the same. And some despise the U87ai. Today's version. So it's not black and white.

Use what you have. Once you feel you've got the max out of that, try some other mic. It doesn't matter if it's a 100$ or a 1000$ mic.

If you believe the slutz, the AKG C1000 must be one of the worst mics ever made, fi. Yet, I've heard some pretty decent recordings made with it.
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 03:09 PM   #99
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 9,409
Default

Shortlist of well known musicians who've used an sm57 for vocal recording [no doubt inst. recording also] -John Lennon, Robert Plant, Peter Gabriel, Joey Ramone, Bono.
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 03:18 PM   #100
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
the AKG C1000 must be one of the worst mics ever made, fi. Yet, I've heard some pretty decent recordings made with it.
OT: No doubt, I have two of them, not so bad. C3000, well I do think that one sucks but maybe it's just me. I got it used but it's the only mic I've ever owned that I've used like twice and has sat in the box for 15 years now.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 03:47 PM   #101
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

Quoting (as has been done in the thread not just by you morgon) some singers who have used the SM series of mics does not justify their selection for voice recordings. It only says they have been used in some circumstances.

Lots of factors come into mic choice and that is not solely down to rock or pop singers who have been recorded with them!

Some feel comfortable with them.
Historically some had no choice in early days.
They have used other mics (Beatles often used the Reslo Ribbon)
Those mics will not suit capturing the best out of opera singers but some similarly priced "budget" mics will do a great job by comparison where the SM58 will be a poor choice!

One of the early question posed was "Maybe the problem for vocals is unless you have a really good (and likely expensive) large diaphragm mic you won't necessarily get better results than the SM58 with some vocalists"

So the presumption there is you need a really good expensive LDC to make a better recording with some vocals?

My opinion is that it is always horses for courses. Sometimes an SM58 would do. Other times it will fail. Examples very quiet voices singing tenderly; someone who has a tonally high quality voice; one that does not need the peaking, where supercardiod is not desirable, capturing a choir of vocalists.
....but the opposite is true too. A nasally singer, one who does not respect the mic, one who thinks they have to swallow it whilst they sing, the recording that just actually sounds acceptable, when that is all you have then why not an SM 58?

So, not necessarily needing an expensive LDC in some situations but that does not imply by any means the SM58 should be the first and only choice for every situation. In many studios I think you will find that it is a long way down the list of chosen mics with the SM57 variety often there as a standby or talkback mic.

As a little aside I do think that too much emphasis is given to limited genres of music and comments about voice recording (including online mic reviews using crap voices!). There is much more out there in the recording world and some should expand their horizons and experience! LDCs and SDC mics can be far more flexible, capture transients much better, have lower noise, make better true stereo recordings (rather than panned mono and a few FX) even in the SM58 price range or a slight budget increase anyway without resorting to several thousands of pounds/dollars.

However I suppose I agree with your question!!

Last edited by Allybye; 02-20-2021 at 06:42 AM. Reason: oops wrote sm59 instead of 58!
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 04:41 PM   #102
tspring
Human being with feelings
 
tspring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Eastern shore of Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
I didn't suggest that and you presume a $3200 Neumann U87 is necessarily better than any other mic. I've got news for you: it isn't. Not even for vocals. For one thing, no two vintage U87s sound the same. And some despise the U87ai. Today's version. So it's not black and white.

Use what you have. Once you feel you've got the max out of that, try some other mic. It doesn't matter if it's a 100$ or a 1000$ mic.
.
I agree completely with what cyrano has to say. We have a mic locker with around 20 different types of mics to choose from. The very expensive Neumnann U87 is not one of the mics that gets the heaviest use on vocals. The much less expensive Electroice RE-20 dynamic mic does get fairly heavy use. But it all depends on the demands of the moment.

The idea that one type or model of microphone will generally sound best is a phantom concept. I spent years wondering if what I recorded would sound better if I just had a 'better' (read that as more expensive) mic. It was like an itch that I couldn't scratch, but I just didn't have the resources to access expensive mics. What I have finally learned is that different and more expensive mics do sound different, but it is often hard to say that one mic is 'better' than another, regardless of price. You can do fine recordings with an SM58. If you find a specific trait of an SM58 that you don't like, say for example, proximity effect, you can find a mic that is 'better' in that respect. But There are usually tradeoffs. An omnidirectional mic has no proximity effect, but room noise is more of an issue, and that HVAC you didn't notice before can become a major issue.

I very much doubt that any listener will hear your recording and say 'oh, there is that SM58 sound'. If you give me audio clips of an SM58 and another mic recorded under identical conditions, and tell me that one one is an SM58, and I can perform a side-by-side (AB) comparison, I could probably tell you which clip was recorded with the SM58. But I doubt that you will find anyone who be able to pick out a clip recorded with an SM58 from a group of other clips recorded with other mics that were not otherwise recorded identically, and AB comparison is not available. There is an old thread here on the forum

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....one+comparison

that includes audio clips of a well done blind comparison of some expensive and not-so expensive mics. The clips are recordings of acoustic guitar, and not voice, but I would bet that you will be surprised at how little difference you can hear between the mics used.

My advice would be to use the SM58 until you thoroughly know its properties and understand how to work with it to get the most out of it. Then think about getting another mic if you still feel the need, and can afford it. You will only gain from the effort.

T

Last edited by tspring; 02-19-2021 at 04:46 PM.
tspring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 05:21 PM   #103
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
OT: No doubt, I have two of them, not so bad. C3000, well I do think that one sucks but maybe it's just me. I got it used but it's the only mic I've ever owned that I've used like twice and has sat in the box for 15 years now.
Well, there you go...

I had two C1000s and didn't like them. I also have a C3000 and do like that. But there's at least three versions of the C3000 out there, so maybe we're talking about a different mic?

Different room, different source...

It's like cooking. Same ingredients, different dish, different taste.
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 05:43 PM   #104
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
Well, there you go...

I had two C1000s and didn't like them. I also have a C3000 and do like that. But there's at least three versions of the C3000 out there, so maybe we're talking about a different mic?

Different room, different source...

It's like cooking. Same ingredients, different dish, different taste.
I've lived in three different places since I got it. It's roughly circa 1997, black model, green band around it. Since I pulled it out to reply, I'll give it another go and see if I still hate it after all these years. C1000s are from roughly the same year, came with the capsules that changed polar patterns etc. I used them only for overheads and acoustic guitar.

I got the AKGs along with an AT4050 (still have it) at around the same time. Those were actually the very first studio mics I purchased way back then beyond having '58s and '57s.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 06:40 PM   #105
DVDdoug
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 2,779
Default

Quote:
I would say this sounds really likely. If you're working with live bands you don't really have the time or the possibility to carefully position mics, gobo up, etc.
They are used because you can set-up a wedge monitor pointed at the back of the mic. With an omni, a PA system is far more prone to feedback and it's hard to get good monitoring.
DVDdoug is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 11:17 PM   #106
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 9,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Allybye View Post
Quoting (as has been done in the thread not just by you morgon) some singers who have used the SM series of mics does not justify their selection for voice recordings. It only says they have been used in some circumstances.
The same could be said for any choice of mic. Back when, even before those well known musicians had loads of money to buy an array of expensive mics, they still would have had, in most cases, early in their recording career, a choice of mic in the studio that they recorded in.
Quote:
Lots of factors come into mic choice and that is not solely down to rock or pop singers who have been recorded with them!
All the while acknowledging that famous pop and rock singers at the least have had success recording with sm57/58's

Quote:
Some feel comfortable with them.
Meaning what, that they feel the sound is good?
Quote:
Historically some had no choice in early days.
[citation needed]
Quote:
They
Who are "they"?
Quote:
..have used other mics (Beatles..
oh, them, and inc. use of the sm57
Quote:
..often used the Reslo Ribbon)
Those mics will not suit capturing the best out of opera singers but some similarly priced "budget" mics will do a great job by comparison where the SM58 will be a poor choice!
Well you got me there, I don't know much about opera recording but I heard the sm57 is quite good at recording Tibetan throat singing.
Quote:
One of the early question posed was "Maybe the problem for vocals is unless you have a really good (and likely expensive) large diaphragm mic you won't necessarily get better results than the SM58 with some vocalists"

So the presumption there is you need a really good expensive LDC to make a better recording with some vocals?

My opinion is that it is always horses for courses. Sometimes an SM58 would do. Other times it will fail. Examples very quiet voices singing tenderly; someone who has a tonally high quality voice; one that does not need the peaking, where supercardiod is not desirable, capturing a choir of vocalists.
....but the opposite is true too. A nasally singer, one who does not respect the mic, one who thinks they have to swallow it whilst they sing, the recording that just actually sounds acceptable, when that is all you have then why not an SM 58?
Roight, so unfeeling brutes won't appreciate the subtle differences [insert Rik Mayall snort] Btw you misspelled "cardioid".
Quote:
So, not necessarily needing an expensive LDC in some situations but that does not imply by any means the SM58 should be the first and only choice for every situation. In many studios I think you will find that it is a long way down the list of chosen mics with the SM57 variety often there as a standby or talkback mic.
It seems to have some adherents here out of a limited number of posters; extrapolate that to the "many studios" and it's still well represented. Oh, almost forgot, unfeeling brutes don't count.
Quote:
As a little aside..
Following your not subtle bludgeoning of sm57 users..
Quote:
I do think that too much emphasis is given to limited genres of music and comments about voice recording (including online mic reviews using crap voices!).
And not enough emphasis on your opinion, right?
Quote:
There is much more out there in the recording world and some should expand their horizons and experience! LDCs and SDC mics can be far more flexible, capture transients much better, have lower noise, make better true stereo recordings (rather than panned mono and a few FX) even in the SM59 price range or a slight budget increase anyway without resorting to several thousands of pounds/dollars.
[citation needed]
Quote:
However I suppose I agree with your question!!
I didn't ask a question, nor does this statement make much sense re the OP, bot alert!
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 12:32 AM   #107
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Yeah, I'm becoming more concerned about shills on the REAPER forum, but not too much.

Where the heck is this thread going at this point? I think a summary is in order.

It's fair to say an SM58 or SM57 can be used to record vocals. Despite the possibilities many people are still skeptical to choose this dynamic mic made by Shure over large diaphragm condenser mics that have a reputation for offering a bigger and more detailed sonic potential. Do LDCs deserve that expectation over an SM58? The humble SM58, an evolution of Shure's Unidyne mics, are not a particularly sophisticated (although the design kind of is) or flattering mic for a vocalist, but it can get the job done. You need to do some careful post-processing to make your vocal shine if you use a SM58 or SM57 (again, thinking about how Liepe's video posted above demonstrates this) but you can destroy what potential might be there by overdoing it. It's a mic that I'm hoping will provide me with a natural sound, and it was designed and marketed originally in 1966 (SM58) for use as a radio/TV/studio production mic. It might be "old" technology, but still it's a good design that's viable as a tool in today's digital recording environment, even for vocals. Some people apparently disagree.

And yes it might not be "best in class" and more a standard, based on popularity and reliability, but what mic is actually "best in class" and how would you even begin to determine such a thing? Even if you did a scientific study and found most people sound a particular way on a particular mic, that's not necessarily the valid indicator of what is best in class. What matters is what's best for an individual. Probably more often what's best for the bedroom producer is to use whatever you have the best way possible.

Given many reputable and respected vocalists have recorded with an SM58, there's obviously potential there if you have recording gear like good mic preamps and post-processing tools and the skills to use them.

I'm still hoping someone will suggest what mic is an obvious better choice for recording vocals (not for performing live, which is a whole other ballgame) that's in the same price range, get's the job done better for some reason, and will almost automatically provide better results than an SM58. I just think this thread is filled with examples why the mic is not going to be the all important element in the recording chain that will ultimately make or break a good vocal recording, that is, provided you're not using either a broken or counterfeit mic.

Are there other mics that might be "better" for your vocals? It depends. With reckless post-processing even the best of sound recordings made with an expensive high quality mic will not sound as good as a simple SM58 with careful use of EQ, compression, and mic positioning. Those of us who can't afford much more than a budget mic can still get acceptable results. It takes time to learn how to tweak the sound for your voice, but results obtained from tracking with a humble SM58 can provide a good starting point. Again, some people disagree.

And not to forget, those of us recording in the home studio environment may need to use a mic like an SM58 over a more sensitive LDC mic because of the noisy environments we have no choice but to adapt to.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 04:01 AM   #108
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I've lived in three different places since I got it. It's roughly circa 1997, black model, green band around it. Since I pulled it out to reply, I'll give it another go and see if I still hate it after all these years. C1000s are from roughly the same year, came with the capsules that changed polar patterns etc. I used them only for overheads and acoustic guitar.

I got the AKGs along with an AT4050 (still have it) at around the same time. Those were actually the very first studio mics I purchased way back then beyond having '58s and '57s.
I have one of the bronze ones...

I like ATs better, lately. Rather dry, not surprising in any way. But sometimes I don't want to be surprised. Years ago, I was more looking for surprises. As you get old, surprises aren't as welcome anymore
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 05:01 AM   #109
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk312 View Post

And not to forget, those of us recording in the home studio environment may need to use a mic like an SM58 over a more sensitive LDC mic because of the noisy environments we have no choice but to adapt to.
If the mic is more sensitive, it's going to have a higher output, and you're going to gain that back down to the same net signal level that you had with the '58. That's kind of what we do when we set gain, level the playing field for incoming signals.

In that regard, the resulting acoustic SNR of the recording doesn't change because the environment is noisy and the mic is an LDC, it just means you don't need as much gain as you do for the '58.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 02-20-2021 at 05:28 AM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 05:03 AM   #110
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

I am not going to respond to all you write @morgon, we seem to have a difference of opinion...and a lot of it comes down to opinion. No intent to ruffle feathers on my part.

But this thread is not a Wiki so no citation is needed. If you think it is then perhaps you would justify your own statement:
"Back when, even before those well known musicians had loads of money to buy an array of expensive mics, they still would have had, in most cases, early in their recording career, a choice of mic in the studio that they recorded in."
Citation needed?

Ah yes my spelling of cardioid was incorrect. Just a typo but hardly worth a mention surely?

The question I was responding to was Peters's original, not one you posed @morgon. I should have made that clearer as it was open to misinterpretation.
I readily admit I am not the best writer!

Peter is summing up the thread quite well. It's horses for courses as the saying goes.

Not sure about your "shills" statement Peter. I agree some post their own opinions (that is not a bad thing) and some misunderstand but is there evidence of pushing certain things for benefit? Perhaps I do not interpret what a "shill" is corrrectly!
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 06:12 AM   #111
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 9,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Allybye View Post
I am not going to respond to all you write @morgon, we seem to have a difference of opinion...and a lot of it comes down to opinion. No intent to ruffle feathers on my part.
Trust me, I have no feathers.
Quote:
But this thread is not a Wiki so no citation is needed. If you think it is then perhaps you would justify your own statement:
"Back when, even before those well known musicians had loads of money to buy an array of expensive mics, they still would have had, in most cases, early in their recording career, a choice of mic in the studio that they recorded in."
Citation needed?
Alrighty, but you were the one implying that sm57's have been used by well known musicians for reasons other than sound quality.

------------

From a sound on sound article about the recording of Peter Gabriel's "Sledgehammer ", a track where he in fact didn't choose the sm57 but nevertheless the following quote from the article is telling -

https://www.soundonsound.com/people/...l-sledgehammer
Quote:
"Peter recorded complete takes of the vocal and then we compiled. That wasn't true for all songs, but for 'Sledgehammer' we created a comp track. Shortly after I arrived, we'd started setting up for vocals and he had told me he normally sang through an SM57. Dan said, 'OK, we'll set up an SM57 but let's set up other microphones as well and do a blindfold test.'
Emphasis mine. Gabriel was plenty successful before Sledgehammer, are you going to posit that he may have had no choice leading up to the moment he declared that he "normally sang through an SM57"?

-----------

I figure gearslutz is quite a discerning audiophile site, as the site exists primarily to evaluate the quality of audio gear -
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-...ad-vocals.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood ➡️
Just a slight correction if my memory serves me correct I believe Flood specifically mentioned the 58.
You're right, actually, it was Kevin Killen that said it was the 57. Someone else said that there used to be a specific 57 they'd save for Bono. Flood did say 58. (Not that I think there's a big difference.)
----------------

Sure this is from their own site [pun intended] but I'm going with "True"
https://www.shure.com/en-US/performa...eed-is-an-sm58
Quote:
Famous Examples of the SM58/SM57 Used in the Studio:
John Lennon - recorded most of his studio vocals on an SM57
Andy Johns, record producer for the Rolling Stones, and Rod Stewart often chooses an SM58 over pricer condenser mics in the studio
Billy Idol's engineer, Mike Frondelli used the SM58 on much of his vocals
______________________________________


Quote:
The question I was responding to was Peters's original, not one you posed @morgon.
What question of mine are you referring to?
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 06:37 AM   #112
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

Apologies @morgon if you took that statement about a question to imply it meant I was referring to any question you might or might not have posted. That would be incorrect. It was purely to clarify I was referring to Peter's original question - that I had quoted.
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 06:40 AM   #113
tspring
Human being with feelings
 
tspring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Eastern shore of Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk312 View Post
I'm still hoping someone will suggest what mic is an obvious better choice for recording vocals...
Better in which way? You are clearly aware that the SM58 is competent in many situations, and that opinions about any microphone will vary greatly from person to person. So what do you want that your SM58 is not providing? Do you want a dry sound, warm sound, detailed sound, smooth transients, airy sound, good directionality, good off-axis response, high sensitivity, good noise rejection, and so on? No microphone can do all of those things, as many desirable traits are mutually exclusive. If you can articulate what you want out of a different microphone, then I think people can make useful suggestions. But nobody can credibly suggest a microphone that is 'obviously better' unless you articulate what better means to you in a specific way. So if you said that you wanted a mic that had better linearity but was good for working in a noisy environment then I think you might get some suggestions that would be helpful. Also important is the price range that you want to consider. Unless you specify that you are going to get many useless suggestions.

T
tspring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 07:01 AM   #114
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 9,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Allybye View Post
Apologies @morgon if you took that statement about a question to imply it meant I was referring to any question you might or might not have posted. That would be incorrect. It was purely to clarify I was referring to Peter's original question - that I had quoted.
Okay, my bad on that one, cheers.
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 07:04 AM   #115
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

@ Peter:

I didnt bother mentioning recording in my somewhat lengthy post because as far as I am concerned, ALL mics are suitable for both, just some are better at one than the other.

As to the original question about "the best mic for recording vocals," there isn`t just one.
Every singer`s voice suits different mics & n many cases different songs with the same singer need different mics, so effectively there is no answer to your original somewhat over-simplified question.

Over the decades I have seen umpteen different mics become flavour of the month for various reasons, some of them actually logical.
FWIW the SM series didnt spring into life in 1966, they were an evolution of the earlier series. If you want to try an interesting adjunct to that SM57/8 golden duo, check out some of the many Unidyne and Unisphere series.
As far as the reslo ribbon mics are concerned, they and Grampian DP4s were about the only mics available to yer average brit musician when I was a lad & although the Reslo WAS better, they were both pretty naff even for live performance. I made my first record in 1962 and the local record company, Granta Records had a very limited setup. A pair of nondescript phillips dynamic "professiomal" mics and a mono full track Phillips 1/4 inch reel to reel with a two channel mono mixer built in.

Hopefully this gives you a little better perspective on the antecedents of the SM series mics.
__________________
Ici on parles Franglais
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 11:41 AM   #116
Peterk312
Human being with feelings
 
Peterk312's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tspring View Post
Better in which way? You are clearly aware that the SM58 is competent in many situations, and that opinions about any microphone will vary greatly from person to person. So what do you want that your SM58 is not providing? Do you want a dry sound, warm sound, detailed sound, smooth transients, airy sound, good directionality, good off-axis response, high sensitivity, good noise rejection, and so on? No microphone can do all of those things, as many desirable traits are mutually exclusive. If you can articulate what you want out of a different microphone, then I think people can make useful suggestions. But nobody can credibly suggest a microphone that is 'obviously better' unless you articulate what better means to you in a specific way. So if you said that you wanted a mic that had better linearity but was good for working in a noisy environment then I think you might get some suggestions that would be helpful. Also important is the price range that you want to consider. Unless you specify that you are going to get many useless suggestions.

T
Yes, all good points. I was again responding to what the REAPER forum member "took-the-red-pill" had to say about there being hundreds of mics that are a better choice for recording vocals compared to an SM58, which is another way of saying you will automatically get "better" results if selecting a mic other than an SM58. I think it's clear that's not really true, but still waiting for this person to come back and explain the statements.
Peterk312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 05:51 PM   #117
g4greg
Human being with feelings
 
g4greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,162
Default

When we're talking about vocals, mics are like underwear.


I'd consider the SM57/58 as boxer shorts. They never sound terrible, and always mostly do the job. IMHO, you should always have a couple of those in the studio, and it probably should be your first microphone, because you can literally mic anything with them and it will always sound OK. (provided the mic placement is good, of course)

Now, some specific mics do sound a lot better for specific voices and for specific applications. You really have to try them to see which one fits you.

For example, My main vocal mic is a Lewitt440. I love it to bits. However, that mic is quite colored, and fits powerful voices like mine better. My duet partner, who uses a lot of falsetto and has a higher, much gentler tone hates that mic to death. She uses an AT4040 that suits her soft voice a looot better.

Also, take in consideration that if you start using condensers, you need a decent room. Because those bastards are extremely sensitive and will pick up room sound. That's another reason why you might want to consider a dynamic.
__________________
Vocals for hire from From pop to metal, and everything in between .
https://www.fiverr.com/gregemond/be-...ger-songwriter
g4greg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2021, 06:25 PM   #118
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by g4greg View Post
Also, take in consideration that if you start using condensers, you need a decent room. Because those bastards are extremely sensitive and will pick up room sound. That's another reason why you might want to consider a dynamic.
I agree condensers aren't always the best choice for live, but it's not the sensitivity, it's the high frequency off-axis rejection being better with dynamics than condensers and/or frequency response. Sensitivity is accounted for when you set the gain -since turning that gain knob is essentially leveling the playing field between the two differing mic output levels.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2021, 05:11 AM   #119
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

And almost all condensers have a HF bump somewhere between 4 and 12 kHz, which doesn't help with feedback rejection either...
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2021, 04:56 AM   #120
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

Perhaps I am missing something here? The thread considers the venerable sm58 vs all other condensers being automatically "better". Not easy to make that comparison.

But in light of some comments on the thread considervtwo mic available at a similar price (the 58 at £99 and the Røde nt1a £115 -including accessories at Thomanns uk their no 1 best seller in LDC mics)

Frequency curve sm58 https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...9QEwBXoECAEQCg
Noting the 5dB lift at and near 5kHz and after a dip at 7kHz again a bit higher

Røde nt1a spec sheet http://www.rode.com/download/nt1-a_datasheet.pdf
Much flatter overall (except low mids) till a bump up of again 5dB but at 15kHz the high edge of voice frequencies.

So over the vast majority of the voice frquency range the condenser is flatter.

Also looking at polar patterns sm 58 at 90deg off axis is 10dB down at 4kHz and only 5 at many lower frequencies and front to back ratio is very good but rather frequency dependant. Nt1a is very even by comparison in it's polar pattern at many frequencies but overall less rejection.

Sm58 on the rejection basis is a better choice for live PA work but the question is raised by Peter for studio work where conditions ought to be more controlled? The 58 will be a good mic for some voices and genres but the nt1a might suit a wider range of voices. To turn the question on it's head does that make the 58 automatically better than all condenser mics?


Of course those above are two specific mics and not generalisms but is it not the case that ldc condensers (excepting the very cheap crap) tend to be a flatter and wider frequency response? Maybe I am wrong.....
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.