Topic: WTF are these mics?

[lsd2525]

And why is Sebastian Bach singing into the sides? Wouldn't these be end-address shotguns?

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/backspin-sebastian-bach-on-his-discography-and-why-heavy-metal-is-for-life-185807197.html

[heathen]

They probably just used the boom mics from the interview for an impromptu photo idea.

[Gutbucket]

Singing from the heart?

[DSatz]

> They probably just used the boom mics from the interview for an impromptu photo idea.

That kind of thing happens a lot. Many engineers are protective of their exact mike choices and positions, and won't allow the ones that they really use to be photographed; many photographs that supposedly show a live recording are in fact posed, and the microphone usage (or even the choice of microphone to be shown) is dictated by visual considerations. For example, the attached NY Times glamor photo shows someone singing into the back of a cardioid microphone that isn't connected to anything.

I collect photos like these, so thanks to the OP for showing us one that I hadn't seen before.

--best regards

[Gutbucket]

^ Love that one.

My guess is the OP photo was taken as he walked into or out of a video interview in which he was seated with the mics just out of frame overhead.  Note the photo backdrop, that he's standing, posture, the height and angle of the microphones..

[voltronic]

Even though it is clearly for him to sing / speak into when seated, I find it odd to have a pair of shotguns (AKGs?) aimed that close together.  I guess they wanted the interview to be in stereo, but I'm curious why they chose that pattern and placement.

There are some who record a soloist within an ensemble with two or three mics, so that they can be panned to "steer" the apparent placement in post when combined with the main stereo pair, or to create depth / width as a separate array unto itself, as opposed to the traditional mono spot mic for a soloist.

Here's an example with a lovely performance of Handel.  This particular setup uses one of the most expensive implementations I've seen of this technique.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDpXhlo0jK0

[Ronmac]

That's what happens when the DOP calls all the shots, including mic placement. LOL

I can't imagine any benefit to having two gun mics that closely paired, but someone thought it was a good idea, even if it was only for optics.

[Gutbucket]

Two mics for redundancy is my guess, not uncommon on a podium.  Speculating that the production crew set up to do multiple interviews with multiple folks and wanted to assure that no technical issues hampered the scheduled talent.

[lsd2525]

Two mics for redundancy is my guess, not uncommon on a podium.  Speculating that the production crew set up to do multiple interviews with multiple folks and wanted to assure that no technical issues hampered the scheduled talent.

Talent? We're talking Sebastian Bach here

[Gutbucket]

touche! ; )

[muj]

Woke up to the sound of pouring rain
The wind would whisper and I'd think of you

 

[John R]

I've always wondered why POTUS speaks into a pair of 57's instead of 58's.  visually appealing i suppose.

[voltronic]

I've always wondered why POTUS speaks into a pair of 57's instead of 58's.  visually appealing i suppose.

https://www.shure.com/americas/products/microphones/sm/sm57vip-dual-microphone-kit

Used by every presidential administration since Lyndon B. Johnson, the SM57VIP holds a special place in American history.

[jerryfreak]

reminds me of chili peppers 'playing' the superbowl with the guitar and bass unplugged

> They probably just used the boom mics from the interview for an impromptu photo idea.

That kind of thing happens a lot. Many engineers are protective of their exact mike choices and positions, and won't allow the ones that they really use to be photographed; many photographs that supposedly show a live recording are in fact posed, and the microphone usage (or even the choice of microphone to be shown) is dictated by visual considerations. For example, the attached NY Times glamor photo shows someone singing into the back of a cardioid microphone that isn't connected to anything.

I collect photos like these, so thanks to the OP for showing us one that I hadn't seen before.

--best regards

[morst]

I've always wondered why POTUS speaks into a pair of 57's instead of 58's.  visually appealing i suppose.

John Lennon had his own SM57 that he preferred to sing through (that I know of)


The thing about 57 vs 58 besides the sound, is that the 57 has a plastic cap, which is isolated from the metal body of the mic. A guitarist could potentially get an electric shock from a 58 if someone has "solved" a hum problem with a "cheater plug" or "ground lift" but the 57 will allow you to touch your electrically "hot" strings and put your lips on the mic and not get ZZZZAPPED!!!!


Perhaps they want to protect the executive from electric shock?

[DSatz]

> Perhaps they want to protect the executive from electric shock?

I've been told on good authority that all electric light switches in the President's quarters (and perhaps throughout the rest of the White House; that wasn't said) are on low-voltage circuits that drive relays. The relays then control the lights, so that the President never touches any part of a circuit that runs at 110 Volts.

In 2009 I discussed this with the engineer who set up the podium microphones for President Obama's inauguration, because I'd heard a rumor that inside the shells of the usual dynamic microphones, condenser microphones of a certain type had been used. He told me that one major consideration was that 48-Volt phantom powering was considered to be too high a voltage, given the regulations that protect the President's safety. Fortunately, the microphones in question allowed 12-Volt phantom powering as well.

Some day I would like to see the actual safety rule. The series resistance in any standard 48-Volt phantom power supply limits the total current to a maximum of 14 mA even in the event of a dead short; for each modulation lead the maximum is only 7 mA. It would be a little odd if the rule didn't consider current--since that, rather than voltage as such, is what could create a safety hazard if there were to be one. We are constantly surrounded by electrostatic charges of hundreds, thousands, even tens of thousands of Volts. As long as there's no (or minimal) current flow, those charges don't affect us; on a dry winter's day we walk across a carpet with our shoes on, and most of the time we get to the other side with our hearts still beating.

But even from a voltage standpoint, Ohm's Law says that the current drawn by the microphone will cause a voltage drop across the feed resistance (the standard says 6.8 kOhms for each modulation lead), so that a 48-Volt microphone that draws 4 mA is actually running at only 30-35 Volts or so.

P.S.: The Speiden ribbons were also widely known in this country as B & O (not the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, but Bang and Olufsen, who distributed them under their own label).

[tim in jersey]

The recording engineer likely chose these mics and placement to reduce the amount of vocals captured in the recording...