Mic comparison
 

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
I'd have thought that placement was actually rather *more* important,
along with the acoustic environment. And if we are getting so anal as
to start trying to identify individual "preferred" mics from a type,
how about temperature? It'll affect the sound carrying properties of
the air as well as the degree of expansion and electrical resistance of
the metal in the microphone.

Phew. ;-)

--
*Forget the Joneses, I keep us up with the Simpsons.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Mic comparison
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...


No two mics sound the same. In fact there may be
differences between mics of the same type from the
same maker. Charles Gerhardt, at RCA, had picked out
and written down the serial numbers of two Neumann
KM 83s which he said he preferred for solo acoustic
instruments, to any of the others.

That seems like a whopping generality. It is well known that the preferred
type of microphone varies with instrument and application. So, picking out a
pair from a population of a certain specific microphone for micing *all*
solo acoustic instruments seems like a reach. They are both string
instruments, but what could be more different than a piano and a guitar?

Placement is almost as important as the choice of
microphone. The saxophone is quite a difficult
instrument in that respect.

Sorta.

I'd have thought that placement was actually rather
*more* important, along with the acoustic environment.
And if we are getting so anal as to start trying to
identify individual "preferred" mics from a type, how
about temperature? It'll affect the sound carrying
properties of the air as well as the degree of expansion
and electrical resistance of the metal in the microphone.

I don't see a clear hierarchy between mic choice and mic placement that is
true in every case. Frankly, you need to get both right. The usual sequence
of events is IME to choose a mic and try to place it, and revisit your
choice if you can't find "The right place" to put it.

Mic comparison
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
No two mics sound the same. In fact there may be
differences between mics of the same type from the
same maker. Charles Gerhardt, at RCA, had picked out
and written down the serial numbers of two Neumann
KM 83s which he said he preferred for solo acoustic
instruments, to any of the others.

That seems like a whopping generality. It is well known that the
preferred type of microphone varies with instrument and application.
So, picking out a pair from a population of a certain specific
microphone for micing *all* solo acoustic instruments seems like a
reach. They are both string instruments, but what could be more
different than a piano and a guitar?

Indeed. He might well have had his other mics of the same make serviced
too - it's surprising how much crap collects on the diaphragm.

However, 'names' are no less likely to bull**** than others. Maybe even
more likely since they will be listened to.

The only audio device well known for varying between samples for no good
reason was the EMT reverb plate. When you had a good one, you let no-one
near it. ;-)

--
*I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Mic comparison
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Nothing much doing so I've posted the quick microphone comparison I
mentioned recently.

These are are a simultaneous sax recording with two different mics, one
costing about 10X the price of the other:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/MicA.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/MicB.wav


Anybody pick a clear winner?

(Playing and/or recording quality here is nor the issue - both mics
suffered the same treatment and no editing has been done to the
recordings
other than an attempt to match the levels somewhat.)


C'mon boys and girls - no response is not an option! Here are the two mics
in question (still in place):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/TwoMics.jpg


Like I say: The Neumann (with the requisite pre) is about 10X the price of
the Samson USB mic and I don't think there's a lot in it!

(But that's just me and my 'cloth' ears! ;-)



Could we just have a bit of male speech instead please?..

With some pauses in it ...



OK, Tony, here's my next door neighbour and very good friend Maurice:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...e%20fisher.jpg


Talking 'not posh' (he says he doesn't do 'posh'! :-) thus:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-A.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-B.wav


(A and B naming convention is consistent with the previous recordings.)

Mic comparison
 

On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:45:43 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


OK, Tony, here's my next door neighbour and very good friend Maurice:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...e%20fisher.jpg


Talking 'not posh' (he says he doesn't do 'posh'! :-) thus:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-A.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-B.wav


(A and B naming convention is consistent with the previous recordings.)



Not going to chooses "better" for the simple reason that I've never
heard Maurice speak, but I'm going to say that mic A is not handling
this as well as B.

d

Mic comparison
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message


Not going to chooses "better" for the simple reason that
I've never heard Maurice speak, but I'm going to say that
mic A is not handling this as well as B.

One of my hot buttons - people who comment on how *natural* something
sounds, but they've never ever actually heard exactly it live.

The more relevent word is probably "believable" but its really all ********
unless it sounds truely weird.

Mic comparison
 

On 06/04/2011 23:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Keith wrote:
Like I say: The Neumann (with the requisite pre) is about 10X the price
of the Samson USB mic and I don't think there's a lot in it!

There's a lot moreslap

Than you know for sure.

Mic comparison
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:45:43 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


OK, Tony, here's my next door neighbour and very good friend Maurice:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...e%20fisher.jpg


Talking 'not posh' (he says he doesn't do 'posh'! :-) thus:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-A.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Maurice-B.wav


(A and B naming convention is consistent with the previous recordings.)



Not going to chooses "better" for the simple reason that I've never
heard Maurice speak,



Like most people when a mic is thrust in front of them, take it from me
that's Maurice not sounding a lot like the Maurice I know!!



but I'm going to say that mic A is not handling
this as well as B.


OK, thanks for that. I'll not reveal the mics at this stage.

Mic comparison
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Don Pearce" wrote in message


Not going to chooses "better" for the simple reason that
I've never heard Maurice speak, but I'm going to say that
mic A is not handling this as well as B.

One of my hot buttons - people who comment on how *natural* something
sounds, but they've never ever actually heard exactly it live.


Yes, its like the 'being there' BS we used to get in here a few years back!



The more relevent word is probably "believable" but its really all
******** unless it sounds truely weird.


Which more or less confirms that 'fi' has been fairly 'hi' since Elvis
Presley 78s..!!

;-)

Mic comparison
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Nothing much doing so I've posted the quick microphone comparison I
mentioned recently.

These are are a simultaneous sax recording with two different mics, one
costing about 10X the price of the other:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/MicA.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/MicB.wav


Anybody pick a clear winner?


Morning Keith,


Evening Iain!



I am away at the moment, and so can only listen
in a rather rudimentary fashion. You have presented
two complete segments (instead of switching between them
say every four bars) which makes comparison more difficult.

I get the impression (on headphones) that Mic.A has less
high frequency content? Being able to switch an AB of the
two directly would confirm or disprove this.


Not easy to do. What I seek, if possible is someone to stab a finger and say
'that one'!! :-)



Have you compressed/peak limited the signal?


No - like I said, no editing other than volume adjustments.



I am wondering about, for example, the attack of the first
G (E natural on Eb alto saxophone) and hear the same effect
on both versions, so this is probably not a characterisic of
either microphone.

For any kind of comparison purposes of the solo mic,
the leakage of the backing track is somewhat distracting.


Sorry about that.



(Playing and/or recording quality here is nor the issue - both mics
suffered the same treatment and no editing has been done to the
recordings
other than an attempt to match the levels somewhat.)

Mic comparison is not, as I see it, about which sounds
"better" or "worse", "winners" or "losers" but which you
consider to be the more appropriate to capture the sound
which you, have in mind for that particular task.


Yep. IOW which one 'wins' in the contest for the job to hand!



Placement is almost as important as the choice of microphone.
The saxophone is quite a difficult instrument in that respect.


You know me....

;-)



One mic think, from watching TV, that clipping a
Sennheiser 608 on a gooseneck to look down into
bell is a good way to go about it Don'tchakidyerself!


No good to me: one thing I want my sax player to do soon is to start waving
the starts and ends of phrases away from the mic!




It's an interesting topic. Let's discuss it:-)

Hopefully this thread will take off. UKRA seems to
have been very quiet:-)



Yes, well aware that I start 90% of all the threads in here! ('Emptiest
vessels' and all that! ;-)



Breakfast is served.....


I hope it was a good one - I only had Quaker Oats So Simple!! :-)