Topic: Mic advice needed

[p.m.a.]

Hello,

I'm a newbie to this board, but not really a newbie in recording. I've been recording live shows every now and then for about nine years. Untill now I've used Sony MZ-R91 MD but it's broken again and as it is already the third time, I'll get a digital recorder instead of paying for having it fixed. After reading quite a lot of topics here (as well as plenty of reviews and discussions elsewhere) I've decided to order Edirol R-09 HR.


I've lately used Sony ECM MS957 stereo mic (which I got quite cheap last year), but I'm thinking of replacing it with something better. I often tape with permission from the band, so I don't need to get any tiny stealth mics. I also do stealth recording sometimes, so what I'm looking for would be preferably a bit smaller stereo mic that would give better sound quality from loud live shows than my current ECM MS957 does.

Here's a short clip of a Reel Big Fish show I taped earlier this year: http://www.sendspace.com/file/noj43g

The quality is not that good in my opinion, although it probably would've been a bit better if I had not had the mic just standing out of my jeans pocket.. However that night it was the best option available.. I sometimes get better quality in other venues etc., but I doubt that I could get anything significantly better with this mic.

I'm mainly recording reggae/ska shows, so the mic should be able to handle heavy bass. The budget would be something between $100-$300. What would be the best options for me? Or will I have to reconsider the budget and spend a lot more?

 

[meatballs]

Bass -- from my experience (warmth/bottum end) is the hardest thig to get. So, use whatever and tape front and center, as close as possible.

[stevetoney]

The first thing to realize is that the mics mean nothing if you're recording from a bad location...such as out of your jeans pocket.  You could invest $5k on mics and have the mics in a poor location and the recording will sound like crap.

Location is ABSOLUTELY the most important factor for getting a good recording and a $100 mic in the right place will probably sound better than a $5K mic in a bad place every time.

Having said that, there are plenty of great mics in your price range.  I disagree totally with the previous commenter that bass is hard to come by.  It depends on both the equipment you have and the acoustics of the show.  But great bass tones can be obtained with gear that's considered to be less than high end.

While Church Audio CA-14 mics are stealthy, they're also fantastic sounding mics that can be obtained in the $150 range, so personally I think they're the best of both worlds which is what you describe your needs to be.  When you want to run open, just put them up on a stand in the sweet spot and above people's heads (to minimize chatter) and you'll be very pleased.  If you can't use a stand, then they're also small enough to put on a hat or whatever. 

...but don't take my word for it.  Prove it for yourself by taking a listen.  Check it out...this recording was made front and center with some CA-14 omni's which new cost about $140...

http://www.archive.org/details/toubab2009-08-14.ca14o_24bit

...and this recording was made in the exact same location with a pair of Neumann U89i which new cost around $6400 a pair.

http://www.archive.org/details/toubab2009-08-14.u89i_24bit

If you think CA-14's aren't a great value after listening to these two recordings, I'll eat my hat!

Hint about recording...get your mics up higher than waist level for improved results.  Keeping them near you waist is...well a waste.  Sound has to get around peoples bodies, which naturally muffle the sound.  Crisp pure sound on a recording results from sound waves that travel directly in a straight line from the speakers to your mics.  Also, the farther back you are from the stage, the more reverberant sound waves (bouncing off the walls, for example) will factor into your recording.  Some reverb can be pleasing and add to the ambience...lots of reverb usually will be less pleasing and at some point too much reverb will ruin a recording.

[carpa]

I own an Edirol R09 hr. Before this I owned a sony dat pcm m-1 (which is someway better than minidisc) and a sony stereo mic  ecm 979 (which should be better than an ecm 957).
So the starting situation can be considered as similar as p.m.a.

Sold the dat I replaced with Edirol with absolutely no regret and,l broken the mic, I had to substitute it.

I finally bought a Naiant littlebox (battery powered mic preamp) and a couple of Naiant x-x's.  They are very little omni mics (let's say 1/3 of a cigarette) and I clip them on a music stand (you can have a little light t-bar or waht you want). The result is another world in comparison to the sony mic I owned in terms of anything - bass, clarity, deepness and whatever else.
The littlebox, at about 200 dollars, is a great preamp which can allow you to power any mic, either with 48v or 12 or below. It can also feature a stereo unbalanced mic input (not powered) which you can use with battery powered mics like the one you own.
It is true that you can directly plug such a mic into your deck's mic input without a preamp; nevertheless I tried a cheap sony stereo mic I own both passing through naiant and then R09's line in, and going directly into R09 mic in with an astonishing difference in terms of quality.
hope it can help
c

[Belexes]

...but don't take my word for it.  Prove it for yourself by taking a listen.  Check it out...this recording was made front and center with some CA-14 omni's which new cost about $140...

http://www.archive.org/details/toubab2009-08-14.ca14o_24bit

...and this recording was made in the exact same location with a pair of Neumann U89i which new cost around $6400 a pair.

http://www.archive.org/details/toubab2009-08-14.u89i_24bit

If you think CA-14's aren't a great value after listening to these two recordings, I'll eat my hat!

That's an excellent comparison.  Chris needs to charge more for his mics.

[fmaderjr]

It's an amazing comparison. My ears aren't good enough to be able to guess which one costs more.

After listening to comparisons like this I'll never be tempted to spring for expensive mics. My collection of CA mics, Franken Naks, etc. are plenty good enough for me. I'll probably keep trying new preamps and recorders every now and then because I just enjoy playing with them though. Not that I'd expect to hear much of a difference in sound (my ears aren't that great).

[stevetoney]

It's an amazing comparison. My ears aren't good enough to be able to guess which one costs more.

After listening to comparisons like this I'll never be tempted to spring for expensive mics. My collection of CA mics, Franken Naks, etc. are plenty good enough for me. I'll probably keep trying new preamps and recorders every now and then because I just enjoy playing with them though. Not that I'd expect to hear much of a difference in sound (my ears aren't that great).

Given the depth of commitment I have to this hobby, I'm enjoying having both the high end gear for squeezing out the maximum I can out of the live music setting and less bulky gear for situations that warrant ease and minimal size.  However, it seems as if mic technology has progressed in the last number of years such that higher and higher quality results can be obtained with less and less investment.  Or perhaps it's competition rather than technology that's driving the quality vs. cost improvements. 

Regardless, I'll never look down my nose at someone that chooses to limit their investment and maximize the quality given a smaller investment.  I often find myself in situations where my higher-end rig might not sound as good as a recording from a rig that cost less than mine.  The bottom line is that there's no single recording rig that will be perfect for every recording situation we encounter out in the field.

[fmaderjr]

For me, it's just that I can't justify spending the money for Schoeps, Neumanns, etc. when I am so satisfied with how my recordings sound with what I have. If I had tons of extra money I'd probably be tempted to experiment, but given my ears and the comparisons I've heard on this board, I really don't think I'd get much, if any, more enjoyment from the hobby with killer mics.

I could have bought a Schoep's rig with what I just spent at the vet to save a cat's life, but I'm much happier with a live and happy cat and my old equipment.

[Belexes]

I could have bought a Schoep's rig with what I just spent at the vet to save a cat's life, but I'm much happier with a live and happy cat and my old equipment.

Plus your recordings won't sound like mud.

It's amazing what a small, inexpensive rig can get your results-wise with the proper location in a venue, good FOH system, and an experienced FOH tech running the board.

[fmaderjr]

I'm with you, Belexes.

I just made an amazing sounding recording of my friend's band with Franken Naks/Littlebox/Korg MR-1. All but the Littlebox bought used for a total cost of about $700. Hard to see how it could have sounded better no matter how much more I spent.

[Fried Chicken Boy]

+1 for the Church mics.  I have a set of the CA-11's that I love and from what I've heard, the CA-14's are even better.  You could get a set of those with a battery box/pre that's within your budget; bang for the buck, Church products are extremely hard to beat.  Combine that with an R-09HR and you have a real-world-tested rig that quite a few people use and get wonderful results with.  There are lots of examples on the LMA for you to check out and see if you like that setup.  To top it off, Chris is a regular on these boards, stands behind his products and is a pleasure to deal with.

[fmaderjr]

bang for the buck, Church products are extremely hard to beat. 

Love all the Church gear I've tried. Even the CA-11's are capable of making great sounding recordings and you have the versatility of being able to use either card or omni caps depending on the situation. A pair of CA-11's plus a ST-9100 pre and a good recorder like the R9-HR are a great way to get started in recording without spending an arm and a leg. When you get the mics in a good location, your recordings will sound so good, some people may not even feel the need to upgrade (although most will probably be tempted to at least try the CA-14 cards and/or omnis). 

[Belexes]

I'm still reeling over the comp Tonedeaf posted. 

I just wonder if Chris has anything in the works beyond the CA-14's or how much better can you really get?

[jbell]

Tone deaf do you go from your 9100 to your Mt through the 2 1/4 TRS? Great sounding recording with that combo. 

[guysonic]

You'll likely find TS one of the best places for answering questions and resources about recording techniques and gear.

The R-09HR is one the best shirt-pocket sized decks to appear. 

It would be wise to know the technical aspects of this model found on my technical review at: www.sonicstudios.com/r-09hrrev.htm

The R-09HR does NOT require using an external preamplifier as the deck's mic preamplifier's quality is excellent, but the limited 2.4 volt external mic powering feature at the mic jack does not provice ideal or adequate powering of most mics recording live Pop/Rock type performances; you'll almost always need an external mic powering module in-series with the mic going into the deck's input jack.

The exception is one type of mic coupled to internal deck modification making this deck a full performance device suitable for any kind of sound recording.   This is my company's DSM mic + deck MOD-4 upgrade.  This is the most compact recording system available with uncompromising stereo-surround audio recording ability.

The photo below shows the two-piece DSM + R-09HR/MOD-4 system NOT requiring an external mic powering module for getting best quality audio ability in all circumstances.



More deck models allowing this most comact 2-piece system found at:

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=83254.0;all

This information provided to expand your knowledge of choices as you upgrade your gear and recording capabilities