Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers  (Read 3860 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mosquito

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • I am the Bug!
Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« on: November 28, 2009, 04:18:00 PM »
I'm going recommend a singer audition some low-cost large diaphragm condenser mics for use on stage.  What would be similar to a Shure SM27 (or KSM27) or Rode NT1-A?  Any opinions / reviews / comparisons?

The band is amplified acoustic, playing small bars, etc.  Cost is a major consideration, so they'll prolly buy used.

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2009, 06:59:08 PM »
What would they be used for, vocal, instrument, cabs, ambient, OH, etc?

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2009, 11:00:26 PM »
What would they be used for, vocal, instrument, cabs, ambient, OH, etc?

I'm going recommend a singer audition some ....

Offline TNJazz

  • Ninja
  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5530
  • Gender: Male
  • "Those who know, know."
    • NINJA DYNAMITE
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2009, 08:46:50 AM »
Try a beyerdynamic M88 for live vocals.
Check out my band!  --> http://www.ninjadynamite.com

Offline mosquito

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • I am the Bug!
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2009, 09:53:01 AM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2009, 10:07:34 AM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.


I am a big fan of the audix om7 or sennheiser 935 and of course the shure sm-58 don't like the beta 58 much because of the bump in the frequency response at 6k. I also love the beta 87 but that mic is not for everyone. I think another great mic is the AKG 535 a mic that does not get much props but still a great mic that can handle a wide dynamic range with out overload.
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2009, 12:57:47 PM »
I second the suggestion for the AKG C 535 even though it's small-diaphragm. It's a very good microphone for not much money.

I don't think it makes sense to limit yourself to large-diaphragm microphones for this. If there's some particular microphone that you like for a particular application and it happens to be large-diaphragm, fine--but there's no one positive quality or characteristic that all large-diaphragm microphones share, and they have some definite negatives for live work (uneven off-axis response, blocked sight lines, greater weight on the end of a boom arm which leads to more accidents).

--best regards
« Last Edit: November 29, 2009, 01:02:03 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2009, 09:48:23 AM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.

The other mic I love is the Neumann KMS105 its a great mic. As for feedback it might be better to have a good sound tech "ring out" the monitors before you start. If you are using the house sound tech. Try explaining to him that feedback has been a problem and that your singer likes to move around. A good house tech will not have any problem making sure feedback is not an issue. But no monitor will withstand the mic in the horn trick at 5 inches, unless its turned off. Most problems with feedback are not solved with a mic. They are solved with eq and proper monitor placement based on the monitor being used, and realist requests for level. What do I mean about that? Well if your guitar player is on 11 and your bass player is on 14 then you need to get everyone to turn down. I often tell bands I work with this.

1-When you listen to your stage sound it should sound as close to the record as possible if it does not something needs to change.

2- The louder you are the less control I have out front and you will be more likely to need hearing aids when you get older.

3- The best mix is one that is not making your ears bleed. The lower the volume the better the fidelity on stage and off, and the less likely you are to piss off the audience. You will sell more tickets in the future because of better sound. With today's PA systems clarity can be obtained with out huge volumes unfortunately there has been more advancement on PA out front then in stage monitor systems. Sure we have in ear monitors but they can be just as bad as wedges if you are not using limiters on them as protection and monitoring how loud the signal actually going to your ears. Remember you have one set of ears that have to get you through your whole career as a musician.

4- Always have the sound guy come up on stage when your playing so he can hear what your hearing that way if you are having a problem like you cant hear your self. He can tell what might be causing the problem and fix it. Remember you cant fix what you cant hear. The sound guy out front is in front of the PA not on stage he cant hear what you hear. Unless you have a separate monitor guy in that case he better listen to the stage :)

I always got on stage before I started my sound check out front I would always get the monitors working correctly for the band first. Walk on stage and listen to them with the band. It makes them feel more at ease and it also gives me a heads up as to how loud things are on stage and how they sound.

Monitors are an aid to hearing your music not a crutch. The louder they are the more difficult it is to get a great out front sound. If your singer is having problems with feedback it could be the following issues.

1- She is not a loud singer.
2- Your sound tech is clueless
3- Your gear is faulty bad eq ect.
4- Your placement of the monitors is all wrong.
5- You dont take the time to get the monitors eq'ed properly before your show. Hint when the sound guy is ringing out the monitors its a good idea to have ear plugs in or be off the stage, a good burst of feedback can ruin your hearing for the night. And make it very hard to play properly.
6- Your vocal mic is "budget" Get something standard like a sm58 for starters.
7- Your expectations for monitors is way to high. Remember most clubs have crap monitors that are simply so far away from flat it would take a Meyer sim system and a 16 band parametric to make them right. So go through the list see where the problem lies and try these solutions before you go and get a fancy vocal mic. I have been using sm58s for years and never had an issue getting them freaking loud in a monitor system or in the house.


for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline mosquito

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • I am the Bug!
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2009, 03:40:13 PM »
Thanks, the AKG c535 and Audix OM7 do look like a good places to start. 

I'm taking all suggestions and I'm definitely not married to the idea of a LD for the second singer.  Personally, I only know what a handful of stage mics are like and I was very impressed at one of their regular venues when a bluegrass band got some lovely sound out of a KSM44.  I think that would sound good for her, but I know they wouldn't be able to afford one.  So, the idea of auditioning a KSM27 and similar mics comes from that. 

All I do know for sure is that we can't get it with an SM58 and a 2 band EQ -- I did hear one experienced sound man get her to sound OK-to-good with a 3 band, but it still wasn't right -- and none of them paid attention to what they used either time they were in the studio.  ("Damnit, Jim.  We're musicians, not engineers!")

Great thoughts on the feedback with the lead singer.  Really, an SM58 is OK to good to / for her, but socially if I'm recommending mics for one of them I have to do it for all of them.  Their feedback problems have a lot of sources, I think it mainly comes down to the fact that they're usually cramped on a 10' x 10' stage with the house cabinets *right there* and they're doing their own sound when they're really focused on playing. 

Other things that are problematic are the fact that the gear they use is different about half the time and they have monitors only about half of the time.  Also, I think the lead singer doesn't think it's loud enough in the house if it isn't loud for her.   Hmm.  Maybe I should get her some Mickey Mouse-looking headphones; she'd just love that idea ;-)


Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2009, 06:28:45 PM »
Thanks, the AKG c535 and Audix OM7 do look like a good places to start. 

I'm taking all suggestions and I'm definitely not married to the idea of a LD for the second singer.  Personally, I only know what a handful of stage mics are like and I was very impressed at one of their regular venues when a bluegrass band got some lovely sound out of a KSM44.  I think that would sound good for her, but I know they wouldn't be able to afford one.  So, the idea of auditioning a KSM27 and similar mics comes from that. 

Good because it would be a huge mistake... Bluegrass = NO Stage volume you can get away with anything live for blue grass I did sound for a gospel blue grass band in Kentucky with 19,000 people in the audience in the round with a single mic it was an old RCA BX77 worked like a charm.. But there was no stage monitors there was no amps on stage just 6 guys singing and playing acoustic instruments.

All I do know for sure is that we can't get it with an SM58 and a 2 band EQ -- I did hear one experienced sound man get her to sound OK-to-good with a 3 band, but it still wasn't right -- and none of them paid attention to what they used either time they were in the studio.  ("Damnit, Jim.  We're musicians, not engineers!")

LOL if you cant get a good sound out of a 58 you need to hire someone that can. Its not hard to do. REALLY :) What works in the studio Will not work live... Because most if not all large diaphragm condenser mics are designed for a natural sound not a tight polar pattern that is needed for live sound.

Great thoughts on the feedback with the lead singer.  Really, an SM58 is OK to good to / for her, but socially if I'm recommending mics for one of them I have to do it for all of them.  Their feedback problems have a lot of sources, I think it mainly comes down to the fact that they're usually cramped on a 10' x 10' stage with the house cabinets *right there* and they're doing their own sound when they're really focused on playing.

That is a huge problem you cant do your own sound why? because you dont know what it sounds like in the house from on stage.. The size of the stage does nothing to hurt feedback I can get a vocal loud in a phone booth.... Its about using eq and placement of the monitors on stage.. And controlling stage volume... In a small club turn down... Wembly stadium turn up. It would seem to me that if your going to recommend anything you should know something about live sound. I am sensing this is not your background so I would ask advice from people like me on this board and other live sound guys that do know what to recommend. 

Other things that are problematic are the fact that the gear they use is different about half the time and they have monitors only about half of the time.  Also, I think the lead singer doesn't think it's loud enough in the house if it isn't loud for her.   Hmm.  Maybe I should get her some Mickey Mouse-looking headphones; she'd just love that idea ;-)

Welcome to my world... Tell your singer to stop mixing from the stage :) You cant hear shit up there besides whats coming of the back of the PA and the back wall of the club again that tells you nothing about how the room actually sounds. Remind her that most sound systems are very directional and not designed to make the stage sound good but because of the directionality they will project out into the house even when it does not sound right on stage.
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline illconditioned

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2009, 08:23:53 PM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.

The other mic I love is the Neumann KMS105 its a great mic. As for feedback it might be better to have a good sound tech "ring out" the monitors before you start. If you are using the house sound tech. Try explaining to him that feedback has been a problem and that your singer likes to move around. A good house tech will not have any problem making sure feedback is not an issue. But no monitor will withstand the mic in the horn trick at 5 inches, unless its turned off. Most problems with feedback are not solved with a mic. They are solved with eq and proper monitor placement based on the monitor being used, and realist requests for level. What do I mean about that? Well if your guitar player is on 11 and your bass player is on 14 then you need to get everyone to turn down. I often tell bands I work with this.

1-When you listen to your stage sound it should sound as close to the record as possible if it does not something needs to change.

2- The louder you are the less control I have out front and you will be more likely to need hearing aids when you get older.

3- The best mix is one that is not making your ears bleed. The lower the volume the better the fidelity on stage and off, and the less likely you are to piss off the audience. You will sell more tickets in the future because of better sound. With today's PA systems clarity can be obtained with out huge volumes unfortunately there has been more advancement on PA out front then in stage monitor systems. Sure we have in ear monitors but they can be just as bad as wedges if you are not using limiters on them as protection and monitoring how loud the signal actually going to your ears. Remember you have one set of ears that have to get you through your whole career as a musician.

4- Always have the sound guy come up on stage when your playing so he can hear what your hearing that way if you are having a problem like you cant hear your self. He can tell what might be causing the problem and fix it. Remember you cant fix what you cant hear. The sound guy out front is in front of the PA not on stage he cant hear what you hear. Unless you have a separate monitor guy in that case he better listen to the stage :)

I always got on stage before I started my sound check out front I would always get the monitors working correctly for the band first. Walk on stage and listen to them with the band. It makes them feel more at ease and it also gives me a heads up as to how loud things are on stage and how they sound.

Monitors are an aid to hearing your music not a crutch. The louder they are the more difficult it is to get a great out front sound. If your singer is having problems with feedback it could be the following issues.

1- She is not a loud singer.
2- Your sound tech is clueless
3- Your gear is faulty bad eq ect.
4- Your placement of the monitors is all wrong.
5- You dont take the time to get the monitors eq'ed properly before your show. Hint when the sound guy is ringing out the monitors its a good idea to have ear plugs in or be off the stage, a good burst of feedback can ruin your hearing for the night. And make it very hard to play properly.
6- Your vocal mic is "budget" Get something standard like a sm58 for starters.
7- Your expectations for monitors is way to high. Remember most clubs have crap monitors that are simply so far away from flat it would take a Meyer sim system and a 16 band parametric to make them right. So go through the list see where the problem lies and try these solutions before you go and get a fancy vocal mic. I have been using sm58s for years and never had an issue getting them freaking loud in a monitor system or in the house.

Good advice, Chris.

In particular, having the sound tech stand on stage first.  I've almost never seen this being done.

BTW, it would be cool to have an hrtf mic (eg., Sennheiser MKE2002) on stage so the monitor engineer could hear what was going on.

  Richard
Please DO NOT mail me with tech questions.  I will try to answer in the forums when I get a chance.  Thanks.

Sample recordings at: http://www.soundmann.com.

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2009, 09:02:46 PM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.

The other mic I love is the Neumann KMS105 its a great mic. As for feedback it might be better to have a good sound tech "ring out" the monitors before you start. If you are using the house sound tech. Try explaining to him that feedback has been a problem and that your singer likes to move around. A good house tech will not have any problem making sure feedback is not an issue. But no monitor will withstand the mic in the horn trick at 5 inches, unless its turned off. Most problems with feedback are not solved with a mic. They are solved with eq and proper monitor placement based on the monitor being used, and realist requests for level. What do I mean about that? Well if your guitar player is on 11 and your bass player is on 14 then you need to get everyone to turn down. I often tell bands I work with this.

1-When you listen to your stage sound it should sound as close to the record as possible if it does not something needs to change.

2- The louder you are the less control I have out front and you will be more likely to need hearing aids when you get older.

3- The best mix is one that is not making your ears bleed. The lower the volume the better the fidelity on stage and off, and the less likely you are to piss off the audience. You will sell more tickets in the future because of better sound. With today's PA systems clarity can be obtained with out huge volumes unfortunately there has been more advancement on PA out front then in stage monitor systems. Sure we have in ear monitors but they can be just as bad as wedges if you are not using limiters on them as protection and monitoring how loud the signal actually going to your ears. Remember you have one set of ears that have to get you through your whole career as a musician.

4- Always have the sound guy come up on stage when your playing so he can hear what your hearing that way if you are having a problem like you cant hear your self. He can tell what might be causing the problem and fix it. Remember you cant fix what you cant hear. The sound guy out front is in front of the PA not on stage he cant hear what you hear. Unless you have a separate monitor guy in that case he better listen to the stage :)

I always got on stage before I started my sound check out front I would always get the monitors working correctly for the band first. Walk on stage and listen to them with the band. It makes them feel more at ease and it also gives me a heads up as to how loud things are on stage and how they sound.

Monitors are an aid to hearing your music not a crutch. The louder they are the more difficult it is to get a great out front sound. If your singer is having problems with feedback it could be the following issues.

1- She is not a loud singer.
2- Your sound tech is clueless
3- Your gear is faulty bad eq ect.
4- Your placement of the monitors is all wrong.
5- You dont take the time to get the monitors eq'ed properly before your show. Hint when the sound guy is ringing out the monitors its a good idea to have ear plugs in or be off the stage, a good burst of feedback can ruin your hearing for the night. And make it very hard to play properly.
6- Your vocal mic is "budget" Get something standard like a sm58 for starters.
7- Your expectations for monitors is way to high. Remember most clubs have crap monitors that are simply so far away from flat it would take a Meyer sim system and a 16 band parametric to make them right. So go through the list see where the problem lies and try these solutions before you go and get a fancy vocal mic. I have been using sm58s for years and never had an issue getting them freaking loud in a monitor system or in the house.

Good advice, Chris.

In particular, having the sound tech stand on stage first.  I've almost never seen this being done.

BTW, it would be cool to have an hrtf mic (eg., Sennheiser MKE2002) on stage so the monitor engineer could hear what was going on.

  Richard

On some really big shows. I have seen RTA mics at each monitor position and Smaart or something similar for monitoring. All proper shows have a separate monitor engineer that has a cue wedge this is used so that when the mixer hits the PFL button on the monitor output group he can hear the exact sound the artist hears from his position. That being said there are going to be differences like monitor position the amount of monitors most monitor guys will have one listen or cue wedge not 2 like most singers get so the differences could be more bottom end at the musicians position then at the monitor engineers position.. Easy to compensate for that. The eq that is used for the monitor mix is inserted into the group output on the monitor board so that when the mixer hits the PFT or Prefadelisten. He is actually listing to the same eq on his cue wedge. So he can then make adjustments to the mix/eq from his position. There are other eq systems made by companies like TC electronic or Klark Technik that allow you to have a wireless remote and "walk around the stage and eq" very high tech stuff. With in ear monitors we now have mics on stage and pointed at the crowd in some cases that are ambiance mics.. We will some times use a upward expander to expand the mics turn up the gain while the band has stopped playing and turn them back down when they  start to play so they can communicate with each other and hear the crowd. When I worked with Lionel Richie they had "secret mics" that some of the band guys had so they could communicate with the monitor engineer and say more kick more vocal ect. That is how its done on big shows.. On small ones you just need to get off your ass and walk on the stage but most guys are to lazy to go up to hear whats going on. Shame because it puts the band at ease and makes for a better night for all concerned.
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline illconditioned

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Comparing Low-Cost LD Condensers
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2009, 09:10:38 PM »
More details & hopefully I won't muddy the discussion:

The lead singer jumps all over the place, has an almost strident soprano voice and usually gets some feedback every night.  Exciting to watch, but I feel pity for her poor mic.  She's definitely getting supercardioids suggested starting with a Beta 58(A) and a Beta 87(A).

Their third singer is a heartier alto but only has two songs in their songbook.  So far it's sounding like their SM58's work just fine with her as long as she doesn't use the lead singer's EQ.

The second singer is the one I'm trying to come up with ideas for.  She's a warm, bright alto who doesn't move much or eat the mic.  Quintessentially demure.  Like her personality, her voice and singing are careful and considered (if that makes any sense). 

FWIW, she plays the flute on some songs so a mic that would do double-duty would be a plus, but really the first thing they need to do is get the vocal micing worked out.  When they get to auditioning mics, I'll try to get each singer to try most-to-all of them, of course.  I know they're aware they never sound as good live as they could (should) but I think they've just never really gotten into the details because 'it's too techy' or the idea of spending $700+ on new mics seems like too much.

The other mic I love is the Neumann KMS105 its a great mic. As for feedback it might be better to have a good sound tech "ring out" the monitors before you start. If you are using the house sound tech. Try explaining to him that feedback has been a problem and that your singer likes to move around. A good house tech will not have any problem making sure feedback is not an issue. But no monitor will withstand the mic in the horn trick at 5 inches, unless its turned off. Most problems with feedback are not solved with a mic. They are solved with eq and proper monitor placement based on the monitor being used, and realist requests for level. What do I mean about that? Well if your guitar player is on 11 and your bass player is on 14 then you need to get everyone to turn down. I often tell bands I work with this.

1-When you listen to your stage sound it should sound as close to the record as possible if it does not something needs to change.

2- The louder you are the less control I have out front and you will be more likely to need hearing aids when you get older.

3- The best mix is one that is not making your ears bleed. The lower the volume the better the fidelity on stage and off, and the less likely you are to piss off the audience. You will sell more tickets in the future because of better sound. With today's PA systems clarity can be obtained with out huge volumes unfortunately there has been more advancement on PA out front then in stage monitor systems. Sure we have in ear monitors but they can be just as bad as wedges if you are not using limiters on them as protection and monitoring how loud the signal actually going to your ears. Remember you have one set of ears that have to get you through your whole career as a musician.

4- Always have the sound guy come up on stage when your playing so he can hear what your hearing that way if you are having a problem like you cant hear your self. He can tell what might be causing the problem and fix it. Remember you cant fix what you cant hear. The sound guy out front is in front of the PA not on stage he cant hear what you hear. Unless you have a separate monitor guy in that case he better listen to the stage :)

I always got on stage before I started my sound check out front I would always get the monitors working correctly for the band first. Walk on stage and listen to them with the band. It makes them feel more at ease and it also gives me a heads up as to how loud things are on stage and how they sound.

Monitors are an aid to hearing your music not a crutch. The louder they are the more difficult it is to get a great out front sound. If your singer is having problems with feedback it could be the following issues.

1- She is not a loud singer.
2- Your sound tech is clueless
3- Your gear is faulty bad eq ect.
4- Your placement of the monitors is all wrong.
5- You dont take the time to get the monitors eq'ed properly before your show. Hint when the sound guy is ringing out the monitors its a good idea to have ear plugs in or be off the stage, a good burst of feedback can ruin your hearing for the night. And make it very hard to play properly.
6- Your vocal mic is "budget" Get something standard like a sm58 for starters.
7- Your expectations for monitors is way to high. Remember most clubs have crap monitors that are simply so far away from flat it would take a Meyer sim system and a 16 band parametric to make them right. So go through the list see where the problem lies and try these solutions before you go and get a fancy vocal mic. I have been using sm58s for years and never had an issue getting them freaking loud in a monitor system or in the house.

Good advice, Chris.

In particular, having the sound tech stand on stage first.  I've almost never seen this being done.

BTW, it would be cool to have an hrtf mic (eg., Sennheiser MKE2002) on stage so the monitor engineer could hear what was going on.

  Richard

On some really big shows. I have seen RTA mics at each monitor position and Smaart or something similar for monitoring. All proper shows have a separate monitor engineer that has a cue wedge this is used so that when the mixer hits the PFL button on the monitor output group he can hear the exact sound the artist hears from his position. That being said there are going to be differences like monitor position the amount of monitors most monitor guys will have one listen or cue wedge not 2 like most singers get so the differences could be more bottom end at the musicians position then at the monitor engineers position.. Easy to compensate for that. The eq that is used for the monitor mix is inserted into the group output on the monitor board so that when the mixer hits the PFT or Prefadelisten. He is actually listing to the same eq on his cue wedge. So he can then make adjustments to the mix/eq from his position. There are other eq systems made by companies like TC electronic or Klark Technik that allow you to have a wireless remote and "walk around the stage and eq" very high tech stuff. With in ear monitors we now have mics on stage and pointed at the crowd in some cases that are ambiance mics.. We will some times use a upward expander to expand the mics turn up the gain while the band has stopped playing and turn them back down when they  start to play so they can communicate with each other and hear the crowd. When I worked with Lionel Richie they had "secret mics" that some of the band guys had so they could communicate with the monitor engineer and say more kick more vocal ect. That is how its done on big shows.. On small ones you just need to get off your ass and walk on the stage but most guys are to lazy to go up to hear whats going on. Shame because it puts the band at ease and makes for a better night for all concerned.

Thanks for *more* info.  I always wondered why they had mics pointing out into the audience.  I thought it was recording the ambience.  Maybe it is sometimes, but mixing with the in-ear monitors sounds much more plausible...

  Richard
Please DO NOT mail me with tech questions.  I will try to answer in the forums when I get a chance.  Thanks.

Sample recordings at: http://www.soundmann.com.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.079 seconds with 42 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF