Mics best for recording

[Mark Bliss]

New thread Kebler.

[martinweeks]

Just my two cents worth but it is kind of ironic that I spotted your post today as I've been looking at building a small but functional mic collection for different needs.
The writers that say one size does not fit all are all absolutely right. One suggestion for more and better information is the "Recording Revolution" .com go to the site and scroll through the YT vids. There is an extensive video on good solid mics for under the $200.00 price range that all work very well and for different needs. On that website their is also a tutorial on which types of mics work best for specific needs. An example is that lot's of studios large and small still love using the Sure SM57 for guitar amps. But there are other little things to know as well. the angle and distance of the mics from the sound source also have their effects on the sound quality.
Condenser mics are usually preferred for recording vocals because of their sensitivity. However, that also is not an absolute as I've seen vids and have personally used Sure SM58's to record vocals. One advantage of using a dynamic mic like a 58 is that they are what's called cartioid (spl??) which means they pick up sound in front (like your voice) and don't pick up sound/noise from the sides or behind. That's why they are used so much in live bands. Dynamic mics are also helpful for the same reason if your recording/vocal room is not acoustically treated for transient noises like AC, or simply sound reflecting off the walls back into the mic. Ergo sometimes vocals do work out better in recording with a dynamic mic like a 58. I personally know a singer for a well respected Blues Band in Miami that uses a Sure 57 dynamic mic for all his live vocals.

Dynamics don't need phantom power to run and can be plugged into D/a interfaces like the focusrite and from their directly to your DAW (Mixcraft) on the computer. Or use a condenser mic with the Focusrite as it has it's own internal phantom power.

Condensers because they are much more sensitive though are used for vocal recording, acoustic guitar and other acoustic instruments more often then not.
Dynamics are often times used more for instruments like drums because they can tolerate the large thump (air pressure) coming from say a kick drum without damage to the mic, and can be easily controled on input to your computer (don't want to zap your hard drive.)

Currently I have a "Blue Snowball" that works very well with my MC7. But I do use compressors, and EQ extensively to get rid of background noise as I do not have an acoustically treated room for vocals. It is a usb direct mic that plugged directly into the laptop. Almost no issues at all with this one and the sound is extremely clean.

I also have on layaway a kit for just under two hundred dollars that consists of the CAD Audio GXL2200SSP, plus a ribbon mic (which is another form of condenser) plus windscreen and shock mount for desk. Not a bad deal over all.

Their is also something I just found out about today...the Samson Q2E I believe that Radio Shack is selling for $49.00. It is a dynamic mic that has both XLR for plugging into mixers, amps or interface. However is also has usb direct to computer and ability to plug headphones (1/8 inch jack) directly into the mic for live monitoring. Bunch of Vids on YouTube right now on this one. I'm curious about this one as I'd like to know if it will plug into computer AND PA at the same time, so I could actually live record my gigs. don't know yet if that is possible or if it's a "One or the Other" thing. Perhaps some of the folks here might know better.

If the sound quality works out well with the above mentioned I'd have:
1.) Blue Snowball for vocals, background vocals, acoustic guitar recording
2.) Samson for live gigs and possible recording as well recording drums and/or guitar and/or amped guitar.
3.) CAD Audio GXL2200SSP for vocals and background vocals and acoustic guitar.

Mics are as different personality as musicians so they all work well for different types of needs. An in your face loud vocalist for say a grunge or metal band (like think AC/DC) would most likely be better suited for a dynamic like a 58 as they are so close to the mic and screaming. So you would need something that can take a beating and keep on ticking.

Songwriting/Singer (ala coffee house gigs) might be better suited to a condenser mic, especially if you are recording your guitar and voice all at one time.

The good news is that the quality of all of these is going up while the prices are coming down. You could outfit an entire mic box for all manner of different recording/ playing scenarios for way less than $500.00 (use EBay, Amazon and so on)
My Snowball was like $45.00. If I buy the samson that's $45.00. The CAD "Pack" is two different condenser mices plus screen to avoid SS's TT's and pops. So it's worth the $200.00 to me. The focusrite I bought I believe was for like $100.00. So I'm pretty well set now. Oh yeah I also occasionally use my Boss Looper which saves loops to wav files that can be exported to Mixcraft without any problems. That's another way to make use of a basic dynamic mic like a 58. (Create your own harmonies. and multiple guitar loops.) And with a midi controller keyboard that can make use of MC's excellent library of synths and instruments you're good to go.

[Mark Bliss]

Wait, what was the question again?

[Juno]

Wait, what was the question again?

I am wondering what is the BEST Mic(s) for recording with the Mix7 Home Studio Software

So there it is. Home Studio.

And all this time we've been talking about the mics best suited for regular Mixcraft.

Just my two cents worth

You call that post "two cents"? Can we switch wallets?

[Mark Bliss]

My interpreter appears to be broken.

[Ianpb]

One advantage of using a dynamic mic like a 58 is that they are what's called cartioid (spl??) which means they pick up sound in front (like your voice) and don't pick up sound/noise from the sides or behind. That's why they are used so much in live bands.

Condenser microphones also come in cardioid format, as well as omnidirectional. The cardioid pattern is not exclusive to dynamic microphones.

The reason live bands use dynamic microphones is that they are less fragile than than condenser mics; a second reason being that they tend to be less sensitive to stray sounds, and therefore less prone to feedback.

[kebler95]

Well..... Wow martinweeks I am impressed on the detail information. That is more like the post I would like to read more often, rich in detail.. Now I am curious of the CAD, i have read great reviews on this, I am a little hesitant on using this just cause. No solid reason to back it up though. But I enjoyed the information in this thread learned a little bit more on the condsier mics and the Sur mic which to me looked little on the fragile side but i was wrong as i keep on getting people saying they love it. So i will have to invest in this one. But CAD i may need to do some spec info on this a little bit more before i am sold. Just a man of facts and statistics.

[Mark Bliss]

Rich in detail yes. Facts not so much.

Kebler, I don't think you ever really clarified what mic you were looking at, or what your type of use is likely to be, so its been a wandering mess of a thread. Though the thread has some scattered great points and advise.

But I think one you are talking about is a Shure condenser while the conversation (Having no foundation on which to be guided) turned into a defense of the brand and some old Dynamic mics.

The CAD is an inexpensive condenser, of which there are many to choose from with probably VERY little difference between any choice. As I have stated, I can't suggest any I do not have experience with, but I will say if I haven't already that it matters very little. I think I did.
My only suggestion is to go with a recognized brand name and consider what other EXPERIENCED users have recommended. Beyond that:

Do your research and decide what type of mic you want, decide on a price range suitable to your real needs and pick one up. Get some experience using it. It's that experience that is going to make the biggest impact on your results. (I know I said that already too.)

[kebler95]

Oh, my apologizes I thought i had already mentioned that I went with the MXL Mic. A tube mic that i have come to enjoy over the last several days on it is dynamics and sound. I did not mean to go scattered brain. I do hop around a lot on other subjects just like i do inside my mind.

[Mark Bliss]

Yeah, now I recall you mentioning that, but since MXL makes at least 40 models.........
"Tube" narrows it down. I know someone with an MXL 960 Tube Condenser.

[martinweeks]

"Old Mics?"
The Sure 58 has been a standard from which everyone else models and attempts to improve on. Their is a reason it still selling consistently after what...? nearly forty years?
Here's an example of recording with a Sure 58
http://linmarproductions.bandzoogle.com ... start=true

Here's an example of using a Noyman (again spl?? one of those thousand dollar mics)
http://linmarproductions.bandzoogle.com ... start=true

Here's an example of a Blue Snowball.
http://linmarproductions.bandzoogle.com ... start=true

They all have subtle differences. (Emphasis on the word subtle) But when mixing their's always going to be compression and EQing going on. (the duct tape of most mixing.) If you're a hardware oriented recorder most likely the compression is on the front end going in before the track. If you're in the box it's in the track but placed appropriately to create the same effect. The different mics are all about the frequency range and how wide the audio spread is. Background vocals one might want the condenser or ribbon placed at a distance to cause a more natural reverb effect (less time mixing and editing more time producing.) But at the same time if you have a male vocalist with a gruff voice the advantages of a dynamic mic (singer likes to "Eat the Mic") would be better suited especially if you want that vocalist out in front. (Like a gospel band for example.) And again if your mic recording individual drums you sure don't want an ultra sensitive condenser mic sitting right next to the kick. You will kill the mic and possibly damage your computer and speakers. (not to mention your hearing if listening through headphones.)

Like I said different mics have different benefits. Some push the bottom a little bit (emphasis on "Little Bit") Some mics pump the mids and highs. (Male vocalist vs. female vocalist) That is why I'm slowly building a mic collection as they all serve different purposes. Again, check out the recording revolution, MixbusTV, Warren Hart's Produce Like a Pro, and Ian Shepherd. These folks are published mixers/engineers their songs are on the web, and played on radio all the time. So I do believe their opinions might just matter.

Here is the link for Recording Revolution and different mics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw5L9kI47LA It's about fundamentals, and some referrals for good mics and not expensive.

[aquataur]

Man you get some concepts twisted here.

Condenser mics are usually preferred for recording vocals because of their sensitivity.

...relative to a dynamic mic.

One advantage of using a dynamic mic like a 58 is that they are what's called cartioid (spl??) which means they pick up sound in front (like your voice) and don't pick up sound/noise from the sides or behind.

Cardioide, as already mentioned, comes from the "heart" or "kidney" polar pattern and ist not restricted to any particular microphone technology. A dynamic mic in a live situation is less prone to feedback due to its relative insensitivity.

Dynamics are often times used more for instruments like drums because they can tolerate the large thump (air pressure) coming from say a kick drum without damage to the mic (...)

I have read plenty of reviews from people who mike amps and the like with LDC´s. Also, it is unlikely to damage the mic by sound pressure. Question is, how much SPL can it take before it overloads audibly and renders the recording unusable.
The reason for using the ubiquitous Shures is that in miking an amp there is usually no need for a wideband, sensitive microphone. Less sensitivity = less noise sensitivity. Smaller frequency range = less EQ-ing of excess frequency range. Lower weight, lower price, sturdyness - and of course, tradition.

But then... nobody would stop one to record a singer with such an "instrument" microphone... There is no limits.

(...) a ribbon mic (which is another form of condenser) (...)

Ribbons work by induction. Wikipedia

-helmut

[Mark Bliss]

Man you get some concepts twisted here.

[Mark Bliss]

Yep Marty, "old mics"

It's apparent, you haven't actually read or followed this thread, which by the way has long since run its course I think.

And while I have to admire a person who grabs a shovel with both hands and digs a good hole, from my own experience I can confirm its easy to lose track of the depth and need it pointed out when you are about neck deep.

I'd have to suggest its time to put down the shovel and take a break.

[martinweeks]

Yep Marty, "old mics"

It's apparent, you haven't actually read or followed this thread, which by the way has long since run its course I think.

And while I have to admire a person who grabs a shovel with both hands and digs a good hole, from my own experience I can confirm its easy to lose track of the depth and need it pointed out when you are about neck deep.

I'd have to suggest its time to put down the shovel and take a break.

Suit yourself, there are lots of other forums with lots more information. Later.